iil 


iiiiii 


•ttrili! 


lillll: 


BR  160  .A2  A9  1913 

Ayer,  Joseph  Cullen,  1866 

1  944 
A  source  book  for  ancient 

church  history 


A  SOURCE   BOOK 

FOR 

ANCIENT  CHURCH   HISTORY 


v^^ 


A  SOURCE  BOOR.^''^'^^^^ 

FOR 

ANCIENT  CHURCH  HISTORY 

FROM  THE  APOSTOLIC  AGE 

TO   THE 

CLOSE  OF  THE  CONCILIAR  PERIOD 


BY,/ 
JOSEPH   CULLEN  AYER,  Jr.,  Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR    OF    ECCLESIASTICAL    HISTORY    IN    THE    DIVINITY    SCHOOL    OF    THE 
PROTESTANT    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH    IN    PHILADELPHIA. 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS 

1913 


Copyright,  1913,  by 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S   SONS 


Published  October.  1913 


^0 

MY   MOTHER 

WHO   MADE   A   CHOSEN   PROFESSION   POSSIBLE   FOR   ME 
I  DEDICATE   THIS   BOOK 

R.  I.  p. 


PREFACE 

The  value  of  the  source-book  has  long  been  recognized  in 
the  teaching  of  general  history.  In  ecclesiastical  history 
quite  as  much  use  can  be  made  of  the  same  aid  in  instruc- 
tion. It  is  hoped  that  the  present  book  may  supply  a  want 
increasingly  felt  by  teachers  employing  modern  methods  in 
teaching  ecclesiastical  history.  It  has  grown  out  of  class- 
room work,  and  is  addressed  primarily  to  those  who  are 
teaching  and  studying  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  in 
universities  and  seminaries.  But  it  is  hoped  that  it  may 
serve  the  constantly  increasing  number  interested  in  the 
early  history  of  Christianity. 

In  the  arrangement  of  the  selected  illustrative  material,  a 
chronological  analysis  and  grouping  of  topics  has  been  fol- 
lowed, according  to  the  lines  of  treatment  employed  by  K. 
Miiller,  F.  Loofs,  Von  Schubert  in  his  edition  of  Moeller's 
text-book,  and  by  Hergenrother  to  some  extent.  The  whole 
history  of  ancient  Christianity  has  accordingly  been  divided 
into  comparatively  brief  periods  and  subdivided  into  chapters 
and  sections.  These  divisions  are  connected  and  introduced 
by  brief  analyses  and  characterizations,  with  some  indications 
of  additional  source  material  available  in  English. 

A  bibHography  originally  prepared  for  each  chapter  and 
section  has  been  omitted.  When  the  practical  question  arose 
of  either  reducing  the  amount  of  source  material  to  admit  a 
bibliography,  or  of  making  the  book  too  expensive  for  general 
use  by  students,  the  main  purpose  of  the  book  determined  the 
only  way  of  avoiding  two  unsatisfactory  solutions  of  the  prob- 
lem, and  the  bibliography  has  been  omitted.  In  this  there 
may  be  less  loss  than  at  first  appears.     The  student  of  ec- 


viii  PREFACE 

clesiastical  history  is  fortunately  provided  with  ample  biblio- 
graphical material  for  the  ancient  Church  in  the  universally 
available  theological  and  other  encyclopaedias  which  have 
very  recently  appeared  or  are  in  course  of  publication,  and  in 
the  recent  works  on  patristics.  Possibly  the  time  has  come 
when,  in  place  of  duplicating  bibliographies,  reliance  in  such 
matters  upon  the  work  of  others  may  not  be  regarded  as 
mortal  sin  against  the  ethics  of  scholarship.  A  list  of  works 
has  been  given  in  the  General  Bibliographical  Note,  which  the 
student  is  expected  to  consult  and  to  which  the  instructor 
should  encourage  him  to  go  for  further  information  and  biblio- 
graphical material. 

The  book  presupposes  the  use  of  a  text-book  of  Church 
history,  such  as  those  by  Cheetham,  Kurtz,  Moeller,  Funk,  or 
Duchesne,  and  a  history  of  doctrine,  such  as  those  of  Seeberg, 
Bethune-Baker,  Fisher,  or  Tixeront.  Readings  in  more  elab- 
orate treatises,  special  monographs,  and  secular  history  may 
well  be  left  to  the  direction  of  the  instructor. 

The  translations,  with  a  few  exceptions  which  are  noted, 
are  referred  for  the  sake  of  convenience  to  the  Patrology  of 
Migne  or  Mansi's  Concilia.  Although  use  has  been  freely 
made  of  the  aid  offered  by  existing  translations,  especially 
those  of  the  Ante-Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  yet  all  trans- 
lations have  been  revised  in  accordance  with  the  best  critical 
texts  available.  The  aim  in  the  revision  has  been  accuracy 
and  closeness  to  the  original  without  too  gross  violation  of  the 
English  idiom,  and  with  exactness  in  the  rendering  of  ecclesi- 
astical and  theological  technical  terms.  Originality  is  hardly 
to  be  expected  in  such  a  work  as  this. 

An  author  may  not  be  conscious  of  any  attempt  to  make 
his  selection  of  texts  illustrate  or  support  any  particular  phase 
of  Christian  belief  or  ecclesiastical  poHty,  and  his  one  aim  may 
be  to  treat  the  matter  objectively  and  to  render  his  book 
useful  to  all,  yet  he  ought  not  to  flatter  himself  that  in  either 
respect  he  has  been  entirely  successful.  In  ecclesiastical 
history,  no  more  than  in  any  other  branch  of  history,  is  it 


PREFACE  ix 

possible  for  an  author  who  is  really  absorbed  in  his  work  to 
eliminate  completely  the  personal  equation.  He  should  be 
glad  to  be  informed  of  any  instance  in  which  he  may  have 
unwittingly  failed  in  impartiahty,  that  when  occasion  pre- 
sented he  might  correct  it.  The  day  has  gone  by  in  which 
ecclesiastical  history  can  not  be  treated  save  as  a  branch  of 
polemical  theology  or  as  an  apologetic  for  any  particular 
phase  of  Christian  behef  or  practice.  It  has  at  last  become 
possible  to  teach  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  for  many 
centuries  the  greatest  institution  of  Western  Europe,  in  colleges 
and  universities  in  conjunction  with  other  historical  courses. 

This  volume  has  been  prepared  at  the  suggestion  of  the 
American  Society  of  Church  History,  and  valuable  suggestions 
have  been  gained  from  the  discussions  of  that  society.  To 
Professor  W.  W.  Rockwell,  of  Union  Theological  Seminary, 
New  York,  Professor  F.  A.  Christie,  of  Meadville  Theological 
School,  the  late  Professor  Samuel  Macauley  Jackson,  of  New 
York,  and  Professor  Ephraim  Emerton,  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, I  have  also  been  indebted  for  advice.  The  first  two 
named  were  members  with  me  of  a  committee  on  a  Source- 
Book  for  Church  History  appointed  several  years  ago  by  the 
American  Society  of  Church  History. 

That  the  book  now  presented  to  the  public  may  be  of  serv- 
ice to  the  teacher  and  student  of  ecclesiastical  history  is  my 
sincere  wish.  It  may  easily  happen  that  no  one  else  would 
make  just  the  same  selection  of  sources  here  made.  But  it 
is  probable  that  the  principal  documents,  those  on  which  the 
majority  would  agree  and  which  are  most  needed  by  the 
teacher  in  his  work,  are  included  among  those  presented. 
There  are,  no  doubt,  slips  and  defects  in  a  book  written  at 
intervals  in  a  teacher's  work.  With  the  kind  co-operation  of 
those  who  detect  them,  they  may  be  corrected  when  an  op- 
portunity occurs. 

Joseph  Cullen  Ayer,  Jr. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Preface vii 

General  Bibliographical  Note xix 


ANCIENT  CHRISTIANITY 

Division  One. — The  Church  under  the  Heathen  Empire: 

TO  A.  D.  324 3 

Period  I. — The  Apostolic  Age:  to  Circa  A.  D.  100     ...  5 

§  I.  The  Neronian  Persecution 6 

§  2.  The  Death  of  Peter  and  Paul 8 

§3.  The  Death  of  the  Apostle  John 9 

§4.  The  Persecution  under  Domitian 11 

Period  II.— The  Post-Apostolic  Age:  A.  D.  loo-A.  D.  140  13 

§  5.  Christianity  and  Judaism 14 

§  6.  The  Extension  of  Christianity 18 

§  7.  Relation  of  the  Roman  State  to  Christianity  ....  19 

§  8.  Martyrdom  and  the  Desire  for  Martyrdom     ....  22 
§  9.  The  Position  of  the  Roman  Community  of  Christians 

in  the  Church 23 

§  10.  Chiliastic  Expectations 25 

§11.  The  Church  and  the  World 27- 

§  12.  Theological  Ideas 30 

§  13.  Worship  in  the  Post- Apostolic  Period 32 

§  14.  Church  Organization 36 

§  15.  Church  Discipline 42 

§  16.  Moral  Ideas  in  the  Post-Apostolic  Period 45 

.    2i 


xii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Period  III. — The  Critical  Period:  A.  D.  140  to  A.  D.  200  50 

Chapter  I.     The  Church  in  Relation  to  the  Empire  and  Heathen 

Culture 51 

§  17.  The  Extension  of  Christianity 52 

§  18.  Heathen  Religious  Feeling  and  Culture  in  Relation  to 

Christianity 55 

§  19.  The  Attitude  of  the  Roman    Government    toward 

Christians,  A.  D.  138  to  A.  D.  192 64 

§  20.  The  Literary  Defence  of  Christianity 69 

Chapter  II.     The  Internal  Crisis:  The  Gnostic  and  Other  Heret- 
ical Sects 75 

§  21.  The  Earlier  Gnostics:  Gnosticism  in  General  ....  76 
§  22.  The  Greater  Gnostic  Systems:  Basilides  and  Valen- 

tinus 82 

§  23.  Marcion 102 

§  24.  Encratites 105 

§  25.  Montanism 106 

V   Chapter  III.     The  Defence  against  Heresy 109 

§  26.  Councils  as  a  Defence  against  Heresy no 

§  27.  The  Apostolic  Tradition  and  the  Episcopate  ....  in 
§  28.  The   Canon  or  the   Authoritative   New  Testament 

Writings 117 

§  29.  The  Apostles'  Creed 123 

§30.  Later  Gnosticism 126 

§31.  The  Results  of  the  Crisis 128 

Chapter  IV.     The  Beginnings  of  Catholic  Theology 129 

§  32.  The  Apologetic  Conception  of  Christianity     ....  130 

§  2>2,'  The  Asia  Minor  Conception  of  Christianity    ....  135 

Period  IV. — The  Age  of  the  Consolidation  of  the  Church: 

200  TO  324  A.  D 140 

Chapter  I.     The  Political  and  Religious  Conditions  of  the  Em- 
pire   141 

§  34.  State  and  Church  under  Septimius  Severus  and  Cara- 

calla 142 

§35.  Religious  Syncretism  in  thfe  Third  Century    ....  150 


CONTENTS  xiii 

PAGE 

§  36.  The  Religious  Policy  of  the  Emperors  from  Heliogaba- 

lus  to  Philip  the  Arabian,  217-249 151 

§37.  The  Extension  of  the  Church  at  the  Middle  of  the 

Third  Century 156 

Chapter  II.     The  Internal  Development  of  the  Church  in  Doc- 
trine, Custom,  and  Constitution 159 

§  38.  The  Easter  Controversy  and  the  Separation  of  the 

Churches  of  Asia  Minor  from  the  Western  Churches  161 

§39.  The  Religion  of  the  West:   Its  Moral  and  Juristic 

Character 165 

§40.  The  Monarchian  Controversies 171 

(A)  Dynamistic  Monarchianism 172 

(B)  Modalistic  Monarchianism 175 

§41.  Later  Montanism  and  the  Consequences  of  Its  Ex- 
clusion from  the  Church 181 

§  42.  The  Penitential  Discipline 183 

\/§43.  The  Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria:  Clement  and 

Origen 189 

I  X  §  44.  Neo-Platonism 202 

Chapter  III.     The  First  General  Persecution  and  Its  Conse- 
quences   205 

§  45.  The  Decian-Valerian  Persecution 206 

§  46.  Effects  of  the  Persecution  upon  the  Inner  Life  of 

the  Church 212 

Chapter  IV.     The  Period  of  Peace  for  the  Church:   A.  D.  260 

to  A.  D.  303 218 

§47.  The  Chiliastic  Controversy 219 

V^  §  48.  Theology  of  the  Second  Half  of  the  Third  Century 

under  the  Influence  of  Origen 221 

§49.  The  Development  of  the  Cultus 231 

§  50.  The  Episcopate  in  the  Church 237 

§51.  The  Unity  of  the  Church  and  the  See  of  Rome  .    .    .  240 

§  52.  Controversy  over  Baptism  by  Heretics 245 

§  53.  The  Beginnings  of  Monasticism 248 

§  54.  Manichaeanism 252 

Chapter  V.     The  Last  Great  Persecution 256 

§  55.  The  Reorganization  of  the  Empire  by  Diocletian  .    .  257 

§  56.  The  Diocletian  Persecution 258 

§  57.  Rise  of  Schisms  in  Consequence  of  the  Diocletian  Per- 
secution       265 


xiv  CONTENTS 


PAGE 


Division  Two. — The  Church  under  the  Christian  Empire: 
from  312  to  circa  750 272 

Period  I. — The  Imperial  State  Church  of  the  Undivided 
Empire,  or  until  the  Death  of  Theodosius  the 
Great,  395 276 

Chapter  I.     The  Church  and  Empire  under  Constantine  ....  276 

§  58.  The  Empire  under  Constantine  and  His  Sons    ...  277 

§  59.  The  Favor  Shown  the  Church  by  Constantine  ...  281 

§  60.  The  Repression  of  Heathenism  under  Constantine    .  285 

§  61.  The  Donatist  Schism  under  Constantine 287 

§  62.  Constantine's  Endeavors  to  Bring  about  the  Unity  of 
the  Church  by  Means  of  General  Synods:  the  Coun- 
cils of  Aries  and  Nicaea 289 

Chapter  II.     The  Arian  Controversy  until  the  Extinction  of  the 
Dynasty  of  Constantine 297 

§  63.  The  Outbreak  of  the  Arian  Controversy  and  the  Coun- 
cil of  Nicaea  A.  D.  325 299 

§  64.  The  Beginnings  of  the  Eusebian  Reaction  under  Con- 
stantine   306 

§65.  The  Victory  of  the  Anti-Nicene  Party  in  the  East  .    .     310 

§  66.  Collapse  of  the  Anti-Nicene  Middle  Party;  the  Re- 
newal of  Arianism;  the  Rise  of  the  Homoousian 
Party 315 

§  67.  The  Policy  of  the  Sons  of  Constantine  toward  Hea- 
thenism and  Donatism 320 

§  68.  Julian  the  Apostate      325 

Chapter  III.     The  Triumph  of  the  New-Nicene  Orthodoxy  over 
Heterodoxy  and  Heathenism 336 

§  69.  The  Emperors  from  Jovian  to  Theodosius  and  Their 

Policy  toward  Heathenism  and  Arianism     ....     337 
§  70.  The  Dogmatic  Parties  and  Their  Mutual  Relations  .     348 
§  71.  The  Emperor  Theodosius  and  the  Triumph  of  the 
New  Nicene  Orthodoxy  at  the  Council  of  Constan- 
tinople A.  D.  381   352 

Chapter  IV.     The  Empire  and  the  Imperial  State  Church  ...  356 

§  72.  The  Constitution  of  the  State  Church 358 

(A)  The  Ecumenical  Council 358 

(B)  The  Hierarchical  Organization 360 

§  73.  Sole  Authority  of  the  State  Church 370 


CONTENTS  XV 

PAGE 

§  74.  The  Position  of  the  State  Church  in  the  Social  Order 

of  the  Empire 380 

§  75.  Social  Significance  of  the  State  Church 384 

§  76.  Popular  Piety  and  the  Reception  of  Heathenism  in 

the  Church 396 

§  77.  The  Extension  of  Monasticism  throughout  the  Empire  401 
§  78.  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy  and  the  Regulation  of  Clerical 

Marriage 411 

(A)  Clerical  Marriage  in  the  East 412 

(B)  Clerical  Celibacy  in  the  West 415 

Period  II. — The  Church  from  the  Permanent  Division  of 
THE  Empire  until  the  Collapse  of  the  Western  Em- 
pire AND  the  First  Schism  between  the  East  and  the 
West,  or  Until  About  A.  D.  500 419 

Chapter  I.     The  Church  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Permanent 
Separation  of  the  Two  Parts  oj  the  Roman  Empire 420 

§  79.  The  Empire  of  the  Dynasty  of  Theodosius     ....     421 
§  80.  The  Extension  of  the  Church  about  the  Beginning  of 

the  Fifth  Century 425 

Chapter  II.     The  Church  of  the  Western  Empire  in  the  Fifth 
Century 429 

§  81.  The  Western  Church  toward  the  End  of  the  Fourth 

Century      430 

V  §  82.  Augustine's  Life  and  Place  in  the  Western  Church  .  433 

§  83.  Augustine  and  the  Donatist  Schism 445 

§  84.  The  Pelagian  Controversy 455 

§  85.  The  Semi-Pelagian  Controversy 466 

§  86.  The  Roman  Church  as  the  Centre  of  the  Catholic 

Roman  Element  of  the  West 476 

Chapter  III.     The  Church  in  the  Eastern  Empire 481 

§  87.  The  First  Origenistic  Controversy  and  the  Triumph 

of  Traditionalism 483 

§  88.  The    Christological   Problem   and   the    Theological 

Tendencies 493 

§  89.  The  Nestorian  Controversy;   the  Council  of  Eph- 

esus,  A.  D.  431 504 

§  90.  The  Eutychian  Controversy  and  the  Council  of  Chal- 

cedon  A.  D,  451 511 


xvi  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

§91.  Results  of  the  Decision  of  Chalcedon:  the  Rise  of 

Schisms  from  the  Monophysite  Controversy  ...      522 

§  92.  The  Church  of  Italy  under  the  Ostrogoths  and  during 
the  First  Schism  between  Rome  and  the  Eastern 
Church 529 


Period  III.— The  Dissolution  of  the  Imperial  State 
Church  and  the  Transition  to  the  Middle  Ages:  from 
THE  Beginning  of  the  Sixth  Century  to  the  Latter 
Part  of  the  Eighth 538 

Chapter  I.     The  Church  in  the  Eastern  Empire 540 

§  93.  The  Age  of  Justinian 541 

§  94.  The  Byzantine  State  Church  under  Justinian  .  .  .  553 
§  95.  The  Definitive  Type  of  Religion  in  the  East:  Dionys- 

ius  the  Areopagite 560 

Chapter  II.     The  Transition  to  the  Middle  Ages.    The  Founda- 
tion of  the  Germanic  National  Churches 564 

§  96.  The  Celtic  Church  in  the  British  Isles 566 

§  97.  The  Conversion  of  the  Franks.   The  Establishment  of 

Catholicism  in  the  Germanic  Kingdoms 570 

§  98.  The  State  Church  in  the  Germanic  Kingdoms  .  .  .  579 
§  99.  Gregory  the  Great  and  the  Roman  Church  in  the 

Second  Half  of  the  Sixth  Century 590 

§  100.  The  Foundation  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church    .    .    .  602 

Chapter  III.     The  Foundation  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Institutions 
of  the  Middle  Ages 615 

§  loi.  Foundation  of  the  Mediaeval  Diocesan  and  Paro- 
chial Constitution 616 

§  102.  Western  Piety  and  Thought  in  the  Period  of  the  Con- 
version of  the  Barbarians 620 

§  103.  The  Foundation  of  the  Mediaeval  Penitential  System  624 

§  104.  The  New  Monasticism  and  the  Rule  of  Benedict  of 

Nursia 630 

(A)  Benedict  of  Nursia,  Regula 631 

(B)  Formulae 641 

§  105.  Foundation  of  Mediaeval  Culture  and  Schools    .    .    .  644 


CONTENTS  xvii 


PAGE 


Chapter  IV.  The  Revohitioft  in  the  Ecclesiastical  and  Political 
Situation  Due  to  the  Rise  of  Islam  and  the  Doctrinal  Disputes 
in  the  Eastern  Church 652 

§  106.  The  Rise  and  Extension  of  Islam 653 

§  107.  The  Monothelete  Controversy  and  the  Sixth  General 

Council,  Constantinople,  A.  D.  681 660 

§  108.  Rome,    Constantinople,    and    the    Lombard    State 

Church  in  the  Seventh  Century 672 

§  109.  Rome,    Constantinople,   and   the   Lombards  in   the 

Period  of  the  First  Iconoclastic  Controversy;  the 

Seventh  General  Council,  Nicaea,  A.  D.  787   .    .    .     684 

Index 699 


GENERAL  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

Under  each  period  special  collections  of  available  sources  are  to  be 
found.  The  student  is  not  given  any  bibliography  of  works  bearing 
on  the  topics,  but  is  referred  to  the  following  accessible  works  of 
reference  of  recent  date  for  additional  information  and  bibliographies: 

The  New  Schaf-Herzog  Encyclopcedia  of  Religious  Knowledge^  edited 
by  S.  M.  Jackson,  New  York,  1908-12. 

The  Catholic  Encyclopedia,  New  York,  1907-12. 

The  Encyclopcedia  Britannica,  eleventh  edition,  Cambridge,  1910. 

The  Encyclopcedia  of  Religion  and  Ethics,  edited  by  J.  Hastings,  Edin- 
burgh and  New  York,  i9o8jf.     (In  course  of  publication.) 

For  the  patristic  writers,  their  lives,  works,  editions,  and  other  bib- 
liographical matter,  see: 

G.  Krliger,  History  of  Early  Christian  Literature  in  the  First  Three 
Cejituries,  English  translation  by  C.  R.  Gillett,  New  York,  1897. 
Cited  as  Kriiger. 

B.  Bardenhewer,  Patrologie,  Freiburg-i.-B.,  191 1,  English  translation 
of  second  edition  (1901)  by  T.  J.  Shahan,  St.  Louis,  1908.  Cited 
as  Bardenhewer. 

In  addition  to  the  encyclopaedias  the  following  are  indispensable, 
and  should  be  consulted: 

Smith  and  Wace,  Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  Literature,  Sects, 
and  Doctrines,  London,  1877-87.  (The  Condensed  Edition  of 
191 1  by  no  means  takes  the  place  of  this  standard  work.)  Cited 
DCB. 

Smith  and  Cheetham,  Dictionary  of  Christian  Antiquities,  London, 
1875-80.     Cited  DCA. 

xix 


XX  GENERAL    BIBLIOGRAPHICAL    NOTE 

Advanced  students  and  those  capable  of  using  French  and  German 
are  referred  to  the  following,  which  have  admirable  and  authoritative 
articles  and  ample  bibliographies: 

Realencyclop(Bdie  fur  protestantische  Theologie,  edited  by  A.  Hauck, 
Leipsic,  1896  J".  Two  supplementary  volumes  appeared  in  1913. 
Cited  PRE. 

Kirchenlexicon  oder  EncyclopcBdie  der  katholischen  Theologie  und  ihrer 
Hilfswissenschaften,  second  edition,  by  J.  Hergenrother  und  F. 
Kaulen,  Freiburg-i.-B.,  1882-1901.     Cited  KL. 

Dictionnaire  de  Theologie  Catholique,  edited  by  A.  Vacant  and  E.  Man- 
genot,  Paris,  1903  f- 

Dictionnaire  d'Archeologie  Chritienne  et  de  Liturgie,  edited  by  F.  Cabrol, 
1903/- 

Dictionnaire  d'Histoire  et  de  Geographic  Ecclesiastiques ,  edited  by  A. 
Baudrillart,  A.  Vogt,  and  U.  Rozies,  Paris,  1909  J". 

Collections  of  sources  in  the  original  languages,  easily  procured 
and  to  be  consulted  for  texts  and  to  some  extent  for  bibliographies: 

C.  Mirbt,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte  des  Papsttums  und  des  romischen 
Katholizismus,  third  edition,  Tubingen,  191 1.     Cited  as  Mirbt. 

C.  Kirch,  S.  J.,  Enchiridion  fontium  histories  ecclesiasticce  antiques j 
Freiburg-i.-B.,  1910.     Cited  as  Kirch. 

H.  Denziger,  Enchiridion  symbolorum,  definitionum  et  declarationum  de 
rebus  fidei  et  morum,  eleventh  edition,  edited  by  Clemens  Bann- 
wart,  S.  J.,  Freiburg-i.-B.,  1911.     Cited  as  Denziger. 

A.  Hahn,  Bibliothek  der  Symbole  und  Glaubensregeln  der  alten  Kirche, 
third  edition,  Breslau,  1897.     Cited  as  Hahn. 

G.  Kriiger,  Sammlung  ausgewdhlter  kirchen  und  dogmengeschichtlicher 
Quellenschriften,   Freiburg-i.-B. 

Of  this  useful  collection  especially  important  are  the  following 
of  more  general  application: 

E.  Preuschen,  Analecta:  KUrzere  Texte  zur  Geschichte  der  alten 

Kirche  und  des  Kanons,  second  edition,  1909-10. 

F.  Lauchert,  Die  Kanones  der  wichtigsten  altkirchlichen  Concilien 

nebst  den  apostolischen  Kanones. 

R.  Knopf,  Ausgewdhlte  Mdrtyreracten.     Cited  as  Knopf. 
Other  volumes  are  cited  in  connection  with  topics. 


GENERAL    BIBLIOGRAPHICAL    NOTE        xxi 

H.  T.  Bruns,  Canones  apostolorum  et  conciliorum  sceculorum  /F,  F,  VI, 
VIIj  Berlin,  1839.     Cited  as  Bruns. 

Although  not  source-books,  yet  of  very  great  value  for  the  sources 
they  contain  should  be  mentioned: 

^    J.  C.  L.  Gieseler,  A  Text-Book  of  Church  History,  English  translation, 
New  York,  1857. 

Y  K.  R.  Hagenbach,  A  History  of  Christian  Doctrines,  English  transla- 
tion, Edinburgh,  1883-85. 

C.  J.  Hefele,  Conciliengeschichte,  Freiburg-i.-B.,  1855-70.  Second 
edition,  1873  et  seq.  A  new  French  translation  with  admirable 
supplementary  notes  has  just  appeared.  The  English  transla- 
tion {History  of  the  Councils),  Edinburgh,  1876-95,  extends  only 
through  the  eighth  century.     Cited  as  Hefele. 


A  SOURCE  BOOK 
FOR  ANCIENT  CHURCH  HISTORY 


THE  FIRST  DIVISION  OF  ANCIENT 
CHRISTIANITY 


THE  CHURCH  UNDER  THE  HEATHEN  EMPIRE: 
TO  A.  D.  324 

By  the  accession  of  Constantine  to  the  sole  sovereignty  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  A.  D.  324,  ancient  Christianity  may  be 
conveniently  divided  into  two  great  periods.  In  the  first,  it 
was  a  religion  liable  to  persecution,  suffering  severely  at 
times  and  always  struggling  to  maintain  itself;  in  the  second, 
it  became  the  religion  of  the  State,  and  in  its  turn  set  about 
to  repress  and  persecute  the  heathen  rehgions.  It  was  no 
longer  without  legal  rights;  it  had  the  support  of  the  secular 
rulers  and  was  lavishly  endowed  with  wealth.  The  condi- 
tions of  the  Church  in  these  two  periods  are  so  markedly  dif- 
ferent, and  the  conditions  had  such  a  distinct  effect  upon  the 
life  and  growth  of  the  Christian  religion,  that  the  reign  of 
Constantine  is  universally  recognized  as  marking  a  transition 
from  one  historical  period  to  another,  although  no  date  which 
shall  mark  that  transition  is  universally  accepted.  The  year 
311,  the  year  in  which  the  Diocletian  persecution  ceased,  has 
been  accepted  by  many  as  the  dividing  point.  The  exact 
date  adopted  is  immaterial. 

The  principal  sources  in  English  for  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  before  A.  D.  324  are: 

The  Ante-Nicene  Fathers.  Translations  of  the  Writings  of 
the  Fathers  down  to  A.D.  325.  American  edition,  Buffalo 
and  New  York,  1 885-1 896;  new  edition.  New  York,  1896  (a 
reprint).    The  collection,  cited  as  ANF,  contains  the  bulk  of 

3 


4      CHURCH  UNDER  THE  HEATHEN  EMPIRE 

the  Christian  literature  of  the  period,  with  the  exception  of 
the  less  important  commentaries  of  Origen. 

Eusebius,  Church  History.  Translated  with  Prolegomena 
and  Notes  by  Arthur  Cushman  McGiffert.  In  A  Select  Library 
of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Second  series,  New  York,  1890.  The  Church  History  of 
Eusebius  is  the  foundation  of  the  study  of  the  history  of  the 
Church  before  A.  D.  324,  as  it  contains  a  vast  number  of  cita- 
tions from  works  now  lost.  The  edition  by  Professor  Mc- 
Giffert is  the  best  in  English,  and  is  provided  with  scholarly 
notes,  which  serve  as  an  elaborate  commentary  on  the  text. 
It  should  be  in  every  library.  This  work  is  cited  as  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec.  The  text  used  in  the  extracts  given  in  this  source 
book  is  that  of  Ed.  Schwartz,  in  Die  Griechischen  Christlichen 
Schrijtsteller  der  ersten  drei  Jahrhunderte.  Kleine  Ausgabe, 
Leipsic,  1908.  This  text  is  identical  with  the  larger  and  less 
convenient  edition  by  the  same  editor. 


PERIOD  I 

THE  APOSTOLIC  AGE:   TO  CIRCA  A.  D.  100 

The  period  in  the  Church  before  the  clash  with  Gnosticism 
and  the  rise  of  an  apologetic  literature  comprises  the  apostolic 
and  the  post-apostoHc  ages.  These  names  have  become  tra- 
ditional. The  so-called  apostolic  age,  or  to  circa  loo,  is  that 
in  which  the  Apostles  lived,  though  the  best  tradition  makes 
John  the  only  surviving  Apostle  for  the  last  quarter  of  a 
century. 

The  principal  sources  for  the  history  of  the  Church  in  this 
period  are  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  and  only  to  a 
slight  degree  the  works  of  contemporaneous  Jewish  and 
heathen  writers.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  reproduce  New 
Testament  passages  here.  The  Jewish  references  of  impor- 
tance will  be  found  in  the  works  on  the  life  of  Christ  and  of 
St.  Paul.  As  the  treatment  of  this  period  commonly  falls 
under  a  different  branch  of  study,  New  Testament  exegesis, 
it  is  not  necessary  in  Church  history  to  enter  into  any  detail. 
There  are,  however,  a  few  references  to  events  in  this  period 
which  are  to  be  found  only  outside  the  New  Testament,  and 
are  of  importance  to  the  student  of  Church  history.  These 
are  the  Neronian  persecution  (§  i),  the  death  of  the  Apostles 
(§§2,  3),  and  the  persecution  under  Domitian  (§4).  The 
paucity  of  references  to  Christianity  in  the  first  century  is 
due  chiefly  to  the  fact  that  Christianity  appeared  to  the  men 
of  the  times  as  merely  a  very  small  Oriental  religion,  struggling 
for  recognition,  and  contending  with  many  others  coming 
from  the  same  region.  It  had  not  yet  made  any  great  ad- 
vance either  in  numbers  or  social  importance. 

5 


6  APOSTOLIC  AGE:   TO  CIRCA  A.  D.  100 

§  I.  The  Neronian  Persecution. 
§  2.  The  Death  of  Peter  and  Paul. 
§  3.  The  Death  of  John. 
§  4.  The  Persecution  of  Domitian. 

§  I.    The  Neronian  Persecution 

The  Neronian  persecution  took  place  A.  D.  64.  The  occa- 
sion was  the  great  fire  which  destroyed  a  large  part  of  the 
city  of  Rome.  To  turn  pubhc  suspicion  from  himself  as  re- 
sponsible for  the  fire,  Nero  attempted  to  make  the  Christians 
appear  as  the  incendiaries.  Many  were  put  to  death  in  hor- 
rible and  fantastic  ways.  It  was  not,  however,  a  persecution 
directed  against  Christianity  as  an  unlawful  religion.  It  was 
probably  confined  to  Rome  and  at  most  the  immediate  vicin- 
ity, and  there  is  no  evidence  that  it  was  a  general  persecution. 

Additional  source  material:  Lactantius,  De  Mortibus  Persecutorum, 
ch.  2  (ANF,  VII);  Sulpicius  Severus,  Chronicon,  II,  28  (PNF,  ser.  II, 
vol.  XI). 

(a)  Tacitus,  Annales,  XV,  44.  Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  §  3  :  i. 
Mirbt,  n.  3. 

Tacitus  (c.  52-c.  117),  although  not  an  eye-witness  of  the  persecu- 
tion, had  exceptionally  good  opportunities  for  obtaining  accurate  in- 
formation, and  his  account  is  entirely  trustworthy.  He  is  the  principal 
source  for  the  persecution. 

Neither  by  works  of  benevolence  nor  the  gifts  of  the  prince 
nor  means  of  appeasing  the  gods  did  the  shameful  sus- 
picion cease,  so  that  it  was  not  beheved  that  the  fire  had  been 
caused  by  his  command.  Therefore,  to  overcome  this  rumor, 
Nero  put  in  his  own  place  as  culprits,  and  punished  with  most 
ingenious  cruelty,  men  whom  the  common  people  hated  for 
their  shameful  crimes  and  called  Christians.  Christ,  from 
whom  the  name  was  derived,  had  been  put  to  death  in  the 
reign  of  Tiberius  by  the  procurator  Pontius  Pilate.  The 
deadly  superstition,  having  been  checked  for  a  while,  began 
to  break  out  again,  not  only  throughout  Judea,  where  this 


THE  NERONIAN  PERSECUTION  7 

mischief  first  arose,  but  also  at  Rome,  where  from  all  sides  all 
things  scandalous  and  shameful  meet  and  become  fashionable. 
Therefore,  at  the  beginning,  some  were  seized  who  made  con- 
fessions ;  then,  on  their  information,  a  vast  multitude  was  con- 
victed, not  so  much  of  arson  as  of  hatred  of  the  himaan  race. 
And  they  were  not  only  put  to  death,  but  subjected  to  insults, 
in  that  they  were  either  dressed  up  in  the  skins  of  wild  beasts 
and  perished  by  the  cruel  mangling  of  dogs,  or  else  put  on 
crosses  to  be  set  on  fire,  and,  as  day  declined,  to  be  burned, 
being  used  as  lights  by  night.  Nero  had  thrown  open  his 
gardens  for  that  spectacle,  and  gave  a  circus  play,  mingling 
with  the  people  dressed  in  a  charioteer's  costume  or  driving  in 
a  chariot.  From  this  arose,  however,  toward  men  who  were, 
indeed,  criminals  and  deserving  extreme  penalties,  sympathy, 
on  the  ground  that  they  were  destroyed  not  for  the  public 
good,  but  to  satisfy  the  cruelty  of  an  individual. 

(b)  Clement  of  Rome,  Ep.  ad  Corinthios,  I,  5,  6.  Funk, 
Patres  Apostolicij  1901.  (MSG,  i  :  218.)  Preuschen,  Ana- 
leda,  I,  §  3  :  5. 

The  work  known  as  the  First  Epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians 
was  written  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  Church  about  100.  The  occa- 
sion was  the  rise  of  contentions  in  the  Corinthian  Church.  The  name 
of  Clement  does  not  appear  in  the  body  of  the  epistle,  but  there  is  no 
good  ground  for  questioning  the  traditional  ascription  to  Clement, 
since  before  the  end  of  the  second  century  it  was  quoted  under  his  name 
by  several  writers.  This  Clement  was  probably  the  third  or  fourth 
bishop  of  Rome.  The  epistle  was  written  soon  after  the  Domitian 
persecution  (A.  D.  95),  and  refers  not  only  to  that  but  also  to  an  earlier 
persecution,  which  was  very  probably  that  under  Nero.  As  the  refer- 
ence is  only  by  way  of  illustration,  the  author  gives  little  detail.  The 
passage  translated  is  of  interest  as  containing  the  earliest  reference 
to  the  death  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  and  the  language  used 
regarding  Paul  has  been  thought  to  imply  that  he  labored  in  parts 
beyond  Rome. 

Ch.  5.  But  to  leave  the  ancient  examples,  let  us  come  to  the 
champions  who  lived  nearest  our  times;  let  us  take  the  noble 
examples  of  our  generation.  On  account  of  jealousy  and 
envy  the  greatest  and  most  righteous  pillars  of  the  Church 


8  APOSTOLIC  AGE:   TO  CIRCA  A.  D.  100 

were  persecuted,  and  contended  even  unto  death.  Let  us  set 
before  our  eyes  the  good  Apostles:  Peter,  who  on  account  of 
unrighteous  jealousy  endured  not  one  nor  two,  but  many 
sufferings,  and  so,  having  borne  his  testimony,  went  to  his 
deserved  place  of  glory.  On  account  of  jealousy  and  strife 
Paul  pointed  out  the  prize  of  endurance.  After  he  had  been 
seven  times  in  bonds,  had  been  driven  into  exile,  had  been 
stoned,  had  been  a  preacher  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  he 
received  the  noble  reward  of  his  faith;  having  taught  righteous- 
ness unto  the  whole  world,  and  having  come  to  the  farthest 
bounds  of  the  West,  and  having  borne  witness  before  rulers, 
he  thus  departed  from  the  world  and  went  unto  the  holy 
place,  having  become  a  notable  pattern  of  patient  endurance. 
Ch.  6.  Unto  these  men  who  lived  lives  of  holiness  was 
gathered  a  vast  multitude  of  the  elect,  who  by  many  in- 
dignities and  tortures,  being  the  victims  of  jealousy,  set  the 
finest  examples  among  us.  On  account  of  jealousy  women, 
when  they  had  been  persecuted  as  Danaids  and  Dircae,  and 
had  suffered  cruel  and  unholy  insults,  safely  reached  the  goal 
in  the  race  of  faith  and  received  a  noble  reward,  feeble  though 
they  were  in  body. 

§  2.    The  Death  of  Peter  and  Paul 

Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  25.  (MSG,  20  :  207.)  CJ.  Mirbt, 
n.  33- 

For  an  examination  of  the  merits  of  Eusebius  as  a  historian,  see 
McGiffert's  edition,  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  I,  pp.  45-52;  also  J.  B.  Light- 
foot,  art.  "Eusebius  (23)  of  Caesarea,"  in  DCB. 

The  works  of  Caius  have  been  preserved  only  in  fragments;  see 
Kriiger,  §  90.  If  he  was  a  contemporary  of  Zephyrinus,  he  probably 
lived  during  the  pontificate  of  that  bishop  of  Rome,  199-217  A.  D. 
The  Phrygian  heresy  which  Caius  combated  was  Montanism;  see 
below,  §  25. 

Dionysius,  Bishop  of  Corinth,  was  a  contemporary  of  Soter,  Bishop 
of  Rome,  166-174  A.  D.,  whom  he  mentions  in  an  epistle  to  the  Roman 
Church.  Of  his  epistles  only  fragments  have  been  preserved;  see 
Kriiger,  §  55.  The  following  extract  from  his  epistle  to  the  Roman 
Church  is  the  earliest  expHcit  statement  that  Peter  and  Paul  suffered 


THE  DEATH  OF  THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  9 

martyrdom  at  the  same  time  or  that  Peter  was  ever  in  Italy.  In  con- 
nection with  this  extract,  that  from  Clement  of  Rome  (see  §  i,  fl)  should 
be  consulted;  also  Lactantius,  De  Mortihus  Persecutorum,  ch.  2  (ANF). 

It  is  therefore  recorded  that  Paul  was  beheaded  at  Rome 
itself,  and  that  Peter  was  crucified  likewise  at  the  same  time. 
This  account  of  Peter  and  Paul  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that 
their  names  are  preserved  in  the  cemeteries  of  that  place  even 
to  the  present  time.  It  is  confirmed  no  less  by  a  member  of 
the  Church,  Caius  by  name,  a  contemporary  of  Zephyrinus, 
Bishop  of  Rome.  In  carrying  on  a  discussion  in  writing  with 
Proclus,  the  leader  of  the  Phrygian  heresy,  he  says  as  follows 
concerning  the  places  where  the  sacred  corpses  of  the  afore- 
said Apostles  are  laid:  ^^But  I  am  able  to  show  the  trophies 
of  the  Apostles.  For  if  you  will  go  to  the  Vatican  or  to  the 
Ostian  Way,  you  will  find  the  trophies  of  those  who  laid  the 
foundations  of  this  church."  And  that  they  two  suffered 
martyrdom  at  the  same  time  is  stated  by  Dionysius,  Bishop 
of  Corinth,  corresponding  with  the  Romans  in  writing,  in 
the  following  words:  "You  have  thus  by  such  admonition 
bound  together  the  planting  of  Peter  and  Paul  at  Rome  and 
at  Corinth.  For  both  planted  in  our  Corinth  and  likewise 
taught  us,  and  in  like  manner  in  Italy  they  both  taught  and 
suffered  martyrdom  at  the  same  time." 

§  3.    The  Death  of  the  Apostle  John 

(a)  Irenaeus,  Adversus  Hcereses,  II,  22,  5;  III,  3,  4.  (MSG, 
7  :  785,  854.) 

Irenaeus  was  bishop  of  Lyons  soon  after  177.  He  was  born  in  Asia 
Minor  about  120,  and  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp  (ob.  circa  155)  and 
of  other  elders  who  had  seen  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord. 

II,  22,  5.  Those  in  Asia  associated  with  John,  the  disciple 
of  the  Lord,  testify  that  John  delivered  it  [a  tradition  regard- 
ing the  length  of  Christ's  ministry]  to  them.  For  he  remained 
among  them  until  the  time  of  Trajan  [98-117  A.  D.]. 

III,  3,  4.     But  the  church  in  Ephesus  also,  which  was 


lo         APOSTOLIC  AGE:   TO  CIRCA  A.  D.  100 

founded  by  Paul,  and  where  John  remained  until  the  time  of 
Trajan,  is  a  faithful  witness  of  the  apostolic  tradition. 

(b)  Jerome,  Comm.  ad  Galat.     (MSL,  26  :  462.) 

The  following  extract  from  Jerome's  commentary  on  Galatians  is 
of  such  late  date  as  to  be  of  doubtful  value  as  an  authority.  There  is, 
however,  nothing  improbable  in  it,  and  it  is  in  harmony  with  other 
traditions.  It  is  to  be  taken  as  a  tradition  which  at  any  rate  repre- 
sents the  opinion  of  the  fourth  century  regarding  the  Apostle  John. 
Cf.  Jerome,  De  Viris  Inlustribus,  ch.  9  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  Ill,  364). 

When  the  holy  Evangelist  John  had  lived  to  extreme  old 
age  in  Ephesus,  he  could  be  carried  only  with  difficulty  by  the 
hands  of  the  disciples,  and  as  he  was  not  able  to  pronounce 
more  words,  he  was  accustomed  to  say  at  every  assembly, 
^'Little  children,  love  one  another."  At  length  the  disciples 
and  brethren  who  were  present  became  tired  of  hearing  always 
the  same  thing  and  said:  "Master,  why  do  you  always  say 
this?"  Thereupon  John  gave  an  answer  worthy  of  himself: 
*' Because  this  is  the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  and  if  it  is 
observed  then  is  it  enough." 

(c)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  31.     (MSG,  20  :  279.) 

Polycrates  was  bishop  of  Ephesus  and  a  contemporary  of  Victor  of 
Rome  (189-199  A.  D.).  His  date  cannot  be  fixed  more  precisely. 
The  reference  to  the  "high  priest's  mitre"  is  obscure;  see  J.  B.  Light- 
foot,  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  p.  345.  A  longer  ex- 
tract from  this  epistle  of  Polycrates  will  be  found  under  the  Easter 
Controversy  (§  38). 

The  time  of  John's  death  has  been  given  in  a  general  way,^ 
but  his  burial-place  is  indicated  by  an  epistle  of  Polycrates 
(who  was  bishop  of  the  parish  of  Ephesus)  addressed  to  Victor 
of  Rome,  mentioning  him,  together  with  the  Apostle  Philip 
and  his  daughters,  in  the  following  words:  "For  in  Asia  also 
great  lights  have  fallen  asleep,  which  shall  rise  again  at  the 
last  day,  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  when  he  shall  come  with 

^  See  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  23,  who  gives  quotations  from  Irenaeus.  This 
passage  also  gives  a  lengthy  extract  from  the  work  of  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
Quis  dives  salvetur,  bearing  on  St.  John's  life  at  Ephesus  (ANF,  II,  591-604). 


THE  PERSECUTION  UNDER  DOMITIAN       ii 

glory  from  heaven  and  seek  out  all  the  saints.  Among  these 
are  Philip,  one  of  the  twelve  Apostles,  who  sleeps  at  Hierapolis, 
and  his  two  aged  virgin  daughters,  and  another  daughter  who 
lived  in  the  Holy  Spirit  and  now  rests  at  Ephesus;  and  more- 
over John,  who  was  both  a  witness  and  a  teacher,  who  re- 
clined upon  the  bosom  of  the  Lord,  and  being  a  priest  wore 
the  high  priest's  mitre,  also  sleeps  at  Ephesus." 

§4.    The  Persecution  under  Domitian 

What  is  commonly  called  the  persecution  under  Domitian 
(81-96)  does  not  seem  to  have  been  a  persecution  of  Chris- 
tianity as  such.  The  charges  of  atheism  and  superstition 
may  have  been  due  to  heathen  misunderstanding  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith  and  worship.  There  is  no  sufficient  ground  for 
identifying  Flavius  Clemens  with  the  Clemens  who  was 
bishop  of  Rome.  For  bibliography  of  the  persecution  under 
Domitian,  see  Preuschen,  Analecta,  second  ed.,  I,  11. 

(a)  Cassius  Dio  (excerpt,  per  Xiphilinum),  Hist.  Rom., 
LXVn,  14/.     Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  §4:11. 

For  Cassius  Dio,  see  Encyc.  Brit.,  art.  "Dio  Cassius." 

•  At  that  time  (95)  the  road  which  leads  from  Sinuessa  to 
Puteoli  was  paved.  And  in  the  same  year  Domitian  caused 
Flavius  Clemens  along  with  many  others  to  be  put  to  death, 
although  he  was  his  cousin  and  had  for  his  wife  Flavia  Domi- 
tilla,  who  was  also  related  to  him.  The  charge  of  atheism 
was  made  against  both  of  them,  in  consequence  of  which  many 
others  also  who  had  adopted  the  customs  of  the  Jews  were 
condemned.  Some  were  put  to  death,  others  lost  their  prop- 
erty.    Domitilla,  however,  was  only  banished  to  Pandataria. 

(6)  Eusebius,  Fw/.  Ec,  HI,  18.     (MSG,  20  :  252.) 

To  such  a  degree  did  the  teaching  of  our  faith  flourish  at 
that  time^  that  even  those  writers  who  were  far  from  our 

1  Reign  of  Domitian,  81-96. 


12         APOSTOLIC  AGE:   TO  CIRCA  A.  D.  100 

religion  did  not  hesitate  to  mention  in  their  histories  the  per- 
secutions and  martyrdoms  which  took  place  during  that  time. 
And  they,  indeed,  accurately  indicate  the  time.  For  they 
record  that,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Domitian,  Flavia  Domi- 
tilla,  daughter  of  a  sister  of  Flavius  Clemens,  who  was  at 
that  time  one  of  the  consuls  of  Rome,  was  exiled  with  many 
others  to  the  island  of  Pontia^  in  consequence  of  testimony 
borne  to  Christ. 

^  Pontia  was  an  island  near  Pandataria.  The  group  is  known  as  Pontiae 
Insulae.  See  DCB,  art.  "  Domitilla,  Flavia  ";  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  ed.  McGififert 
(PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  I),  III,  i8,  notes  4-6;  also  Lightfoot,  Commentary  on  the 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  p.  22,  n.  i. 


PERIOD  II 

THE  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:   A.  D.  100-A.  D.  140 

The  post-apostolic  age,  extending  from  circa  loo  to  circa 
140,  is  the  age  of  the  beginnings  of  Gentile  Christianity  on  an 
extended  scale.  It  is  marked  by  the  rapid  spread  of  Christi- 
anity, so  that  immediately  after  its  close  the  Church  is  found 
throughout  the  Roman  world,  and  the  Roman  Government  is 
forced  to  take  notice  of  it  and  deal  with  it  as  a  religion  (§§6, 
7) ;  the  dechne  of  the  Jewish  element  in  the  Church  and  extreme 
hostility  of  Judaism  to  the  Church  (§  5) ;  the  continuance  of 
chiliastic  expectations  (§  10);  the  beginnings  of  the  passion 
for  martyrdom  (§  8) ;  as  well  as  the  appearance  of  the  forms 
of  organization  and  worship  which  subsequently  became 
greatly  elaborated  and  remained  permanently  in  the  Church 
(§§  12-15);  2,s  also  the  appearance  of  religious  and  moral 
ideas  which  became  dominant  in  the  ancient  Church  (§§  11, 
12,  16).  The  literature  of  the  period  upon  which  the  study 
of  the  conditions  and  thought  of  the  Church  of  this  age  must 
be  based  is  represented  principally  by  the  so-called  Apostolic 
Fathers,  a  name  which  is  convenient,  but  misleading  and  to 
be  regretted.  These  are  Clement  of  Rome,  Barnabas,  Ignatius, 
Polycarp,  Papias,  Hermas;  with  the  writings  of  these  are  com- 
monly included  two  anonymous  books  known  as  the  Didache, 
or  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  and  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus. 
From  all  of  these  selections  are  given. ^ 

1  There  are  three  leading  critical  editions  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers: 
Patrum  Apostolicorum  Opera,  edited  by  A.  von  Gebhardt,  A.  Harnack,  and 
Th.  Zahn,  Leipsic,  1876,  1877,  reprinted  1894  and  since. 

Opera  Patrum  Apostolicorum,  edited  by  F.  X.  Funk,  Tubingen,  1881. 
There  is  a  very  inexpensive  reprint  of  the  text  in  Kriiger's  Sammlung  ausge- 
wdhlter  kirchen-  und  dogmengeschichtlicher  Quellenschriften,  2te  Reihe,  i  Heft. 

13 


14  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:   A.  D.  100-140 

§  5.  Christianity  and  Judaism. 

§  6.  The  Extension  of  Christianity. 

§  7.  Relation  of  the  Roman  State  to  Christianity. 

§  8.  Martyrdom  and  the  Desire  for  Martyrdom. 

§  9.  Position  of  the  Roman  Church. 

§  10.  ChiHastic  Expectations. 

§  II.  The  Church  and  the  World. 

§  12.  Theological  Ideas. 

§  13.  Worship  in  the  Post- Apostolic  Age. 

§  14.  Church  Organization. 

§  15.  Church  Discipline. 

§  16.  Moral  Ideas. 

§  5.    Christianity  and  Judaism 

The  Christian  Church  grew  up  not  on  Jewish  but  on  Gen- 
tile soil.  In  a  very  short  time  the  Gentiles  formed  the  over- 
whelming majority  within  the  Church.  As  they  did  not  be- 
come Jews  and  did  not  observe  the  Jewish  ceremonial  law,  a 
problem  arose  as  to  the  place  of  the  Jewish  law,  which  was  ac- 
cepted without  question  as  of  divine  authority.  One  solution 
is  given  by  the  author  of  the  so-called  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 
which  should  be  compared  with  the  solution  given  by  St. 
Paul  in  his  epistles  to  the  Galatians  and  to  the  Romans.  The 
number  of  conversions  from  Judaism  rapidly  declined,  and 
very  early  an  extreme  hostility  toward  Christianity  became 
common  among  the  Jews. 

{a)  Barnabas,  Epistula,  4,  9. 

The  epistle  attributed  to  Barnabas  is  certainly  not  by  the  Apostle 
of  that  name.  Its  date  is  much  disputed,  but  may  be  safely  placed 
within  the  first  century.     The  author  attempts  to  show  the  contrast 

Funk's  text  is  used  in  the  following  sections,  but  as  the  Apostolic  Fathers  are 
everywhere  accessible  no  references  are  given  to  Migne. 

The  Apostolic  Fathers,  edited  by  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  second  ed.,  part  I,  2  vols. 
(Clement  of  Rome),  London,  1890;  part  II,  3  vols.  (Ignatius  and  Polycarp), 
London,  1889;  smaller  ed.  (containing  all  the  Apostolic  Fathers),  London,  1890. 

The  most  recent  edition  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers  is  that  of  Kirsopp  Lake, 
in  the  Loeb  Classical  Library,  191 2  (text  and  translation  on  opposite  pages). 


CHRISTIANITY  AND  JUDAISM  15 

between  Judaism  and  Christianity  by  proving  that  the  Jews  wholly 
misunderstood  the  Mosaic  law  and  had  long  since  lost  any  claims 
supposed  to  be  derived  from  the  Mosaic  covenant.  The  epistle  is 
everywhere  marked  by  hostiHty  to  Judaism,  of  which  the  writer  has 
but  imperfect  knowledge.  The  book  was  regarded  as  Holy  Scripture 
by  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  by  Origen,  though  with  some  hesitation. 
The  position  taken  by  the  author  was  undoubtedly  extreme,  and  not 
followed  generally  by  the  Church.  It  was,  however,  merely  pushing  to 
excess  a  conviction  already  prevalent  in  the  Church,  that  Christianity 
and  Judaism  were  distinct  rehgions.  For  a  saner  and  more  commonly 
accepted  position,  see  Justin  Martyr,  ApoL,  I,  47-53  (ANF,  I,  178/.). 
A  translation  of  the  entire  epistle  may  be  found  in  ANF,  I,  137-149. 

Ch.  4.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  for  us  who  inquire  much 
concerning  present  events  to  seek  out  those  things  which  are 
able  to  save  us.  Let  us  wholly  flee,  then,  from  all  the  works 
of  iniquity,  lest  the  works  of  iniquity  take  hold  of  us;  and  let 
us  hate  the  error  of  the  present  times,  that  we  may  set  our 
love  on  the  future.  Let  us  not  give  indulgence  to  our  soul, 
that  it  should  have  power  to  run  with  sinners  and  the  wicked, 
that  we  become  not  like  them.  The  final  occasion  of  stum- 
bling approaches,  concerning  which  it  is  written  as  Enoch 
speaks:  For  this  end  the  Lord  has  cut  short  the  times  and 
the  days,  that  His  beloved  may  hasten  and  will  come  to  his 
inheritance.^  ...  Ye  ought  therefore  to  understand.  And 
this  also  I  beg  of  you,  as  being  one  of  you  and  with  special 
love  loving  you  all  more  than  my  own  soul,  to  take  heed  to 
yourselves,  and  not  be  like  some,  adding  largely  to  your  sins, 
and  saying:  ''The  covenant  is  both  theirs  and  ours."  For  it 
is  ours;  but  they  thus  finally  lost  it,  after  Moses  had  already 
received  it.^ 

Ch.  9.  ...  But  also  circimicision,  in  which  they  trusted, 
has  been  abrogated.  He  declared  that  circumcision  was  not  of 
the  flesh;  but  they  transgressed  because  an  evil  angel  deluded 
them.^  .  .  .  Learn,  then,  my  beloved  children,  concerning  all 

*C/.  Matt.  24  :  6,  22;  Mark  13  :  7,  20.  These  words  do  not  occur  in  the 
book  of  Enoch. 

2 The  writer  quotes  Ex.  31  :  18;  34  :  28;   32  :  7;   Deut.  9  :  12. 

^  I.e.,  so  that  they  believed  that  circumcision  should  be  made  in  the  flesh 
and  not  taken  spiritually. 


i6  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:   A.  D.  100-140 

things  richly,  that  Abraham,  the  first  who  enjoined  circum- 
cision, looking  forward  in  spirit  to  Jesus,  circumcised,  the 
teaching  of  the  three  letters  having  been  received.  For  the 
Scripture  saith:  *' Abraham  circumcised  eighteen  and  three 
hundred  men  of  his  household."  What,  then,  was  the  knowl- 
edge [gnosis]  given  to  him  in  this?  Learn  that  he  says  the 
eighteen  first  and  then,  making  a  space,  the  three  hundred. 
The  eighteen  are  the  Iota,  ten,  and  the  Eta,  eight;  and  you 
have  here  the  name  of  Jesus.  And  because  the  cross  was  to 
express  the  grace  in  the  letter  Tau,  he  says  also,  three  hun- 
dred. He  discloses  therefore  Jesus  in  the  two  letters,  and  the 
cross  in  one.  He  knows  this  who  has  put  within  us  the  en- 
grafted gift  of  his  teaching.  No  one  has  learned  from  me  a  more 
excellent  piece  of  knowledge,  but  I  know  that  ye  are  worthy.^ 

(b)  Justin  Martyr,  Dialogus  cum  Try  phone,  17.  J.  C.  T. 
Otto,  Corpus  Apologetarum  Christianorum  ScbcuH  Secundi, 
third  ed.,  1876-81.     (MSG,  6  :  511.) 

Justin  Martyr  was  born  about  100  in  Samaria.  He  was  one  of  the 
first  of  the  Gentiles  who  had  been  trained  in  philosophy  to  become  a 
Christian.  His  influence  upon  the  doctrinal  development  of  the  Church 
was  profound.  He  died  as  a  martyr  between  163  and  168.  His  prin- 
cipal works  are  the  two  Apologies  written  in  close  connection  under 
Antoninus  Pius  (138-161),  probably  about  150,  and  his  dialogue  with 
Trypho  the  Jew,  which  was  written  after  the  first  Apology.  All  trans- 
lations of  Justin  Martyr  are  based  upon  Otto's  text,  v.  supra. 

For  the  other  nations  have  not  been  so  guilty  of  wrong 
inflicted  on  us  and  on  Christ  as  you  have  been,  who  are 
in  fact  the  authors  of  the  wicked  prejudices  against  the  Just 
One   and   against   us   who   hold   by   Him.^    For   after   you 

1 IH  or  lri  =  'lr}aouq-  T  was  taken  as  a  picture  of  a  cross.  For  the  Tau  or 
Egyptian  cross,  see  DCA,  art.  "Cross."  The  method  of  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion here  used  is  that  species  known  as  gematria,  in  which  the  numerical  equiva- 
lence of  letters  composing  a  word  is  employed  as  a  key  to  mystic  meaning.  This 
differs  somewhat  from  the  ordinary  gematria,  for  which  see  Farrar,  History  of 
Interpretation,  1886,  pp.  98/.,  445/.  Barnabas  is  by  no  means  singular  among 
early  Christians  in  resorting  to  Jewish  allegorical  interpretation. 

2  For  the  same  charge  brought  against  the  Jews  of  stirring  up  hostility  against 
the  Christians,  see  Tertullian,  Ad  Nationes,  1, 14;  Adv.  Marcionem,  HI,  22;  Adv. 
Judaos,  13;  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  VI,  27. 


CHRISTIANITY  AND  JUDAISM  17 

had  crucified  Him,  the  only  blameless  and  righteous  Man, 
through  whose  stripes  there  is  heahng  to  those  who  through 
Him  approach  the  Father,  when  you  knew  that  He  had  risen 
from  the  dead  and  ascended  into  heaven,  as  the  prophecies 
foretold  would  take  place,  not  only  did  you  not  repent  of  those 
things  wherein  you  had  done  wickedly,  but  you  then  selected 
and  sent  out  from  Jerusalem  chosen  men  through  all  the  world 
to  say  that  the  atheistical  heresy  of  the  Christians  had  ap- 
peared and  to  spread  abroad  those  things  which  all  they  who 
know  us  not  speak  against  us;  so  that  you  are  the  cause  of 
unrighteousness  not  only  in  your  own  case,  but,  in  fact,  in  the 
case  of  all  other  men  generally.  .  .  .  Accordingly,  you  show 
great  zeal  in  pubhshing  throughout  all  the  world  bitter,  dark, 
and  unjust  slanders  against  the  only  blameless  and  righteous 
Light  sent  from  God  to  men. 

(c)  Martyrdom  of  Poly  carp,  12,  13. 

Polycarp,  Bishop  of  Smyrna,  died  at  Smyrna  February  2,  155,  at  the 
age  of  at  least  eighty-six,  but  he  was  probably  nearer  one  hundred  years 
old.  He  was  the  disciple  of  John,  probably  same  as  the  Apostle  John. 
His  epistle  was  written  circa  115,  soon  after  the  death  of  Ignatius  of 
Antioch.  At  present  it  is  generally  regarded  as  genuine,  though  grave 
doubts  have  been  entertained  in  the  past.  The  martyrdom  was  written 
by  some  member  of  the  church  at  Smyrna  for  that  body  to  send  to  the 
church  at  Philomelium  in  Phrygia,  and  must  have  been  composed  soon 
after  the  death  of  the  aged  bishop.  It  is  probably  the  finest  of  all  the 
ancient  martyrdoms  and  should  be  read  in  its  entirety.  Translation 
in  the  ANF,  I,  37-45- 

Ch.  12.  The  whole  multitude  both  of  the  heathen  and  the 
Jews  who  dwelt  at  Smyrna  cried  out  with  uncontrollable  fury 
and  in  loud  voice:  ^'This  is  the  teacher  of  Asia,  the  father  of 
the  Christians  and  the  overthrower  of  our  gods,  who  teaches 
many  neither  to  sacrifice  nor  to  worship."  Saying  these  things, 
they  cried  out  and  demanded  of  Philip,  the  Asiarch,  to  let  a 
lion  loose  upon  Polycarp.  But  he  said  he  could  not  do  this, 
since  the  sports  with  beasts  had  ended.  Then  it  pleased  them 
to  cry  out  with  one  consent  that  he  should  burn  Polycarp 
alive.  .  .  . 


i8  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:   A.  D.  100-140 

Ch.  13.  These  things  were  carried  into  effect  more  rapidly 
than  they  were  spoken,  and  the  multitude  immediately 
gathered  together  wood  and  fagots  out  of  the  shops  and  baths, 
and  the  Jews  especially,  as  was  their  custom,  assisted  them 
eagerly  in  it. 

§  6.    The  Extension  of  Christianity 

It  is  impossible  to  determine  with  accuracy  even  the  prin- 
cipal places  to  which  Christianity  had  spread  in  the  first  half 
of  the  second  century.  Ancient  writers  were  not  infrequently 
led  astray  by  their  own  rhetoric  in  dealing  with  this  topic. 

Justin  Martyr,  Dialogus  cum  Try  phone,  117.  (MSG, 
6  :  676.) 

The  following  passage  is  of  significance  as  bearing  not  only  upon  the 
extent  to  which  Christianity  had  spread,  after  making  due  allowance 
for  rhetoric,  but  also  upon  the  conception  of  the  eucharist  and  its 
relation  to  the  ancient  sacrifices  held,  by  some  Christians  at  least,  in 
the  first  half  of  the  second  century.  C/.  ch.  41  of  the  same  work,  v. 
infra,  §§  12/. 

Therefore,  as  to  all  sacrifices  offered  in  His  name,  which 
Jesus  Christ  commanded  to  be  offered,  i.  e.,  in  the  euchar- 
ist of  the  bread  and  cup,  and  which  are  offered  by  Chris- 
tians in  all  places  throughout  the  world,  God,  anticipat- 
ing them,  testified  that  they  are  well-pleasing  to  Him;  but 
He  rejects  those  presented  by  you  and  by  those  priests  of  yours, 
saying:  And  your  sacrifices  I  will  not  accept  at  your  hands; 
for  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  unto  the  going  down  of  the  same 
my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles  (He  says),  but  ye  have 
profaned  it.^  But  since  you  deceive  yourselves,  both  you  and 
your  teachers,  when  you  interpret  what  was  said  as  if  the 
Word  spoke  of  those  of  your  nation  who  were  in  the  dis- 
persion, and  that  it  said  that  their  prayers  and  sacrifices 
offered  in  every  place  are  pure  and  well-pleasing,  you  should 
know  that  you  are  speaking  falsely  and  are  trying  to  cheat 
iC/.Mal.  I  :  10-12. 


THE  ROMAN  STATE  AND  CHRISTIANITY      19 

yourselves  in  every  way;  for,  in  the  first  place,  not  even  yet 
does  your  nation  extend  from  the  rising  to  the  setting  sun, 
for  there  are  nations  among  which  none  of  your  race  ever 
dwelt.  For  there  is  not  a  single  race  of  men,  whether  among 
barbarians  or  Greeks,  or  by  whatever  name  they  may  be 
called,  of  those  who  live  in  wagons  or  are  called  nomads  or  of 
herdsmen  Hving  in  tents,  among  whom  prayers  and  thanks- 
givings are  not  offered  through  the  name  of  the  crucified  Jesus 
to  the  Father  and  Maker  of  all  things.  For,  furthermore, 
at  that  time,  when  the  prophet  Malachi  said  this,  your  dis- 
persion over  the  whole  earth,  as  you  are  now,  had  not  taken 
place,  as  is  evident  from  the  Scriptures. 

§  7.    Relation  of  the  Roman  State  to  Christianity 

The  procedure  of  the  Roman  Government  against  the  Chris- 
tians first  took  a  definite  form  with  the  rescript  of  Trajan 
addressed  to  Pliny  circa  A.  D.  111-113,  but  there  is  no  formal 
imperial  edict  extant  before  Decius  on  the  question  of  the 
Christian  religion.  In  an  addition  to  the  rescript  of  Trajan 
addressed  to  Pliny  there  is  a  letter  of  Hadrian  on  the  Chris- 
tians {Ep.  ad  Servianum)  which  is  of  interest  as  giving  the 
opinion  of  that  Emperor,  but  the  rescript  addressed  to  Mi- 
nucius  Fundanus  is  probably  spurious,  as  is  also  the  Epistle  of 
Antoninus  Pius  to  the  Common  Assembly  of  Asia. 

Additional  source  material:  The  text  of  the  rescripts  may  be  found 
in  Preuschen,  Analeda,  1,  §§  6,  7;  translations,  ANF,  I,  186/.,  and 
Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec.  (ed.  McGiffert),  IV,  9,  and  IV,  13. 

(a)  Plinius  Junior,  EpistulcB,  X,  96,  97.  Preuschen,  Ana- 
lecta,  I,  12/.   Cf.  Mirbt,  nn.  14,  15. 

Caius  Caecilius  Secundus  is  commonly  known  as  Pliny  the  Younger, 
to  distinguish  him  from  his  uncle,  PHny  the  NaturaHst,  whose  wealth 
he  inherited  and  whose  name  he  seems  to  have  borne.  He  was  pro- 
praetor of  Bithynia  under  Trajan  (98-117),  with  whom  he  stood  on 
terms  of  friendship  and  even  intimacy.  His  letter  to  the  Emperor 
requesting  advice  as  to  the  right  mode  of  dealing  with  Christians  was 
written  between  iii  and  113. 


/ 

20  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:    A.  D.  100-140 

This  correspondence  is  of  the  first  importance,  as  it  is  unimpeachable 
evidence  as  to  the  spread  of  Christianity  in  the  province  in  which 
Pliny  was  placed,  to  the  customs  of  the  Christians  in  their  worship, 
and  to  the  method  of  dealing  with  the  new  religion,  which  was  followed 
for  a  long  time  with  little  change.  It  established  the  policy  that 
Christianity,  as  such,  was  not  to  be  punished  as  a  crime,  that  the  State 
did  not  feel  called  upon  to  seek  out  Christians,  that  it  would  not  act 
upon  anonymous  accusations,  but  that  when  proper  accusations  were 
brought,  the  general  laws,  which  Christians  had  violated  on  account 
of  their  faith,  should  be  executed.  Christianity  was  not  to  be  treated 
as  a  crime.  The  mere  renunciation  of  Christianity,  coupled  with  the 
proof  of  renunciation  involved  in  offering  sacrifice,  enabled  the  accused 
to  escape  punishment. 

Ep.  96.  It  is  my  custom,  my  lord,  to  refer  to  you  all  ques- 
tions about  which  I  have  doubts.  Who,  indeed,  can  better 
direct  me  in  hesitation,  or  enlighten  me  in  ignorance?  In  the 
examination  of  Christians  I  have  never  taken  part;  therefore 
I  do  not  know  what  crime  is  usually  punished  or  investigated 
or  to  what  extent.  So  I  have  no  Httle  uncertainty  whether 
there  is  any  distinction  of  age,  or  whether  the  weaker  offenders 
fare  in  no  respect  otherwise  than  the  stronger;  whether  pardon 
is  granted  on  repentance,  or  whether  when  one  has  been  a 
Christian  there  is  no  gain  to  him  in  that  he  has  ceased  to  be 
such;  whether  the  mere  name,  if  it  is  without  crimes,  or  crimes 
connected  with  the  name  are  punished.  Meanwhile  I  have 
taken  this  course  with  those  who  were  accused  before  me  as 
Christians:  I  have  asked  them  whether  they  were  Christians. 
Those  who  confessed  I  asked  a  second  and  a  third  time,  threat- 
ening punishment.  Those  who  persisted  I  ordered  led  away 
to  execution.  For  I  did  not  doubt  that,  whatever  it  was  they 
admitted,  obstinacy  and  unbending  perversity  certainly  de- 
serve to  be  punished.  There  were  others  of  the  like  insanity, 
but  because  they  were  Roman  citizens  I  noted  them  down  to 
be  sent  to  Rome.  Soon  after  this,  as  it  often  happens,  because 
the  matter  was  taken  notice  of,  the  crime  became  wide-spread 
and  many  cases  arose.  An  unsigned  paper  was  presented 
containing  the  names  of  many.  But  these  denied  that  they 
were  or  had  been  Christians,  and  I  thought  it  right  to  let  them 


THE  ROMAN  STATE  AND  CHRISTIANITY      21 

go,  since  at  my  dictation  they  prayed  to  the  gods  and  made 
supplication  with  incense  and  wine  to  your  statue,  which  I 
had  ordered  to  be  brought  into  the  court  for  the  purpose,  to- 
gether with  the  images  of  the  gods,  and  in  addition  to  this 
they  cursed  Christ,  none  of  which  things,  it  is  said,  those  who 
are  really  Christians  can  be  made  to  do.  Others  who  were 
named  by  an  informer  said  that  they  were  Christians,  and 
soon  afterward  denied  it,  saying,  indeed,  that  they  had  been, 
but  had  ceased  to  be  Christians,  some  three  years  ago,  some 
many  years,  and  one  even  twenty  years  ago.  All  these  also  not 
only  worshipped  your  statue  and  the  images  of  the  gods,  but 
also  cursed  Christ.  They  asserted,  however,  that  the  amount 
of  their  fault  or  error  was  this :  that  they  had  been  accustomed 
to  assemble  on  a  fixed  day  before  daylight  and  sing  by  turns 
[i.  e.,  antiphonally]  a  hymn  to  Christ  as  a  god;  and  that  they 
bound  themselves  with  an  oath,  not  for  any  crime,  but  to 
commit  neither  theft,  nor  robbery,  nor  adultery,  not  to  break 
their  word  and  not  to  deny  a  deposit  when  demanded;  after 
these  things  were  done,  it  was  their  custom  to  depart  and 
meet  together  again  to  take  food,  but  ordinary  and  harmless 
food;  and  they  said  that  even  this  had  ceased  after  my  edict 
was  issued,  by  which,  according  to  your  commands,  I  had  for- 
bidden the  existence  of  clubs.  On  this  account  I  believed  it 
the  more  necessary  to  find  out  from  two  maid-servants,  who 
were  called  deaconesses  [ministrce],  and  that  by  torture,  what 
was  the  truth.  I  found  nothing  else  than  a  perverse  and 
excessive  superstition.  I  therefore  adjourned  the  examination 
and  hastened  to  consult  you.  The  matter  seemed  to  me  to 
be  worth  deliberation,  especially  on  account  of  the  number 
of  those  in  danger.  For  many  of  every  age,  every  rank,  and 
even  of  both  sexes,  are  brought  into  danger;  and  will  be  in  the 
future.  The  contagion  of  that  superstition  has  penetrated 
not  only  the  cities  but  also  the  villages  and  country  places; 
and  yet  it  seems  possible  to  stop  it  and  set  it  right.  At  any 
rate,  it  is  certain  enough  that  the  temples,  deserted  until  quite 
recently,  begin  to  be  frequented,  that  the  ceremonies  of  re- 


22  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

ligion,  long  disused,  are  restored,  and  that  fodder  for  the 
victims  comes  to  market,  whereas  buyers  of  it  were  until  now 
very  few.  From  this  it  may  easily  be  supposed  what  a  mul- 
titude of  mxcn  can  be  reclaimed  if  there  be  a  place  of  repentance. 

(b)  Ep.  97  (Trajan  to  Pliny).  You  have  followed,  my  dear 
Secundus,  the  proper  course  of  procedure  in  examining  the 
cases  of  those  who  were  accused  to  you  as  Christians.  For, 
indeed,  nothing  can  be  laid  down  as  a  general  law  which  con- 
tains anything  like  a  definite  rule  of  action.  They  are  not  to 
be  sought  out.  If  they  are  accused  and  convicted,  they  are 
to  be  punished,  yet  on  this  condition,  that  he  who  denies  that 
he  is  a  Christian  and  makes  the  fact  evident  by  an  act,  that 
is,  by  worshipping  our  gods,  shall  obtain  pardon  on  his  repent- 
ance, however  much  suspected  as  to  the  past.  Papers,  how- 
ever, which  are  presented  anonymously  ought  not  to  be  ad- 
mitted in  any  accusation.  For  they  are  a  very  bad  example 
and  unworthy  of  our  times. 

§  8.     Martyrdom  and  the  Desire  for  Martyrdom 
Ignatius  of  Antioch,  Ep.  ad  Romanos,  4. 

Ignatius  was  bishop  of  Antioch  in  the  opening  years  of  the  second 
century.  According  to  tradition,  he  suffered  martyrdom  in  Rome 
under  Trajan,  circa  117.  Having  been  sent  from  Antioch  to  Rome 
by  command  of  the  Emperor,  on  his  way  he  addressed  letters  to  various 
churches  in  Asia,  exhorting  them  to  seek  unity  and  avoid  heresy  by 
close  union  with  the  local  bishop.  His  aim  seems  to  have  been  prac- 
tical, to  promote  the  welfare  of  the  Christian  communities  rather  than 
the  exaltation  of  the  episcopal  office  itself.  Doubts  have  arisen  as  to 
the  authenticity  of  these  epistles  on  account  of  the  frequent  references 
to  the  episcopate  and  to  heresy.  Further  difficulty  has  been  caused 
by  the  fact  that  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  appear  in  three  forms  or 
recensions,  a  longer  Greek  recension  forming  a  group  of  thirteen  epistles, 
a  short  Greek  of  seven  epistles,  and  a  still  shorter  Syriac  version  of 
only  three.  After  much  fluctuation  of  opinion,  due  to  the  general 
reconstruction  of  the  history  of  the  whole  period,  which  has  gone 
through  various  marked  changes,  the  opinion  of  scholars  has  been 
steadily  settling  upon  the  short  Greek  recension  of  seven  epistles  as 
authentic,  especially  since  the  critical  re-examination  of  the  whole 
question  by  Zahn  and  Lightfoot. 


THE  ROMAN  COMMUNITY  OF   CHRISTIANS     23 

I  write  to  all  the  churches  and  impress  on  all,  that  I 
shall  willingly  die  for  God  unless  ye  hinder  me.  I  beseech 
you  not  to  show  unseasonable  good- will  toward  me.^  Permit 
me  to  be  the  food  of  wild  beasts,  through  whom  it  will  be 
granted  me  to  attain  unto  God.  I  am  the  wheat  of  God  and 
I  am  ground  by  the  teeth  of  wild  beasts,  that  I  may  be  found 
the  pure  bread  of  Christ.  Rather  entice  the  wild  beasts,  that 
they  may  become  my  tomb  and  leave  nothing  of  my  body,  so 
that  when  I  have  fallen  asleep  I  may  be  burdensome  to  no 
one.  Then  I  shall  be  truly  a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ,  when 
the  world  sees  not  my  body.  Entreat  Christ  for  me,  that  by 
these  instruments  I  may  be  found  a  sacrifice  to  God.  Not  as 
Peter  and  PauP  do  I  issue  commandments  unto  you.  They 
were  Apostles,  I  a  condemned  man;  they  were  free,  I  even 
until  now  a  slave.^  But  if  I  suffer,  I  shall  be  the  freedman  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  shall  rise  again  free  in  Him.  And  ^  /W, 
being  in  bonds,  I  learn  not  to  desire  anything. 

§  9.    The  Position  of  the  Roman  Community  of  Chris- 
tians IN  THE  Church 

The  Roman  Church  took  very  early  a  leading  place  in  the 
Christian  Church,  even  before  the  rise  of  the  Petrine  tradi- 
tion, and  its  importance  was  generally  recognized.  Its  charity 
was  very  widely  known  and  extolled.  It  was  a  part  of  its 
care  for  Christians  everywhere,  a  care  which  found  expression 
later  in  the  obligation  of  maintaining  the  faith  in  the  great 
theological  controversies.  On  the  position  of  the  Roman 
Church  in  this  period,  see  the  address  of  the  Epistle  of  Ignatius 
to  the  Romans  (ANF,  I,  73),  as  also  the  relation  of  Polycarp 

^  The  Christians  at  Rome  seem,  according  to  this  statement,  to  have  been 
in  such  a  position  that  they  might  be  able  to  interfere  in  the  case  of  prisoners. 

2  A  possible  reference  to  the  presence  of  Peter  and  Paul  at  Rome,  but  by  no 
means  certain,  as  epistolatory  commands  would  fulfil  the  conditions  better. 
The  connection  of  Peter  with  Rome,  however,  is  very  significant. 

3  It  can  not  be  concluded  from  this  that  Ignatius  was  of  servile  condition. 
His  journey  to  Rome  in  chains  might  be  enough  here  to  explain  the  language, 
especially  when  the  style  of  Ignatius  is  considered. 


24  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

to  the  Roman  Church  in  connection  with  the  question  of  the 
date  of  Easter  (see  §  38,  below). 

Dionysius  of  Corinth,  ''Epistle  to  the  Roman  Church/^  in 
Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  23.  (MSG,  20  :  388.)  For  text,  see 
Kirch,  n.  49/. 

Moreover,  there  is  still  current  an  Epistle  of  Dionysius  to 
the  Romans,  addressed  to  Soter,  bishop  at  that  time.  But 
there  is  nothing  like  quoting  its  words  in  which,  in  approval 
of  the  custom  of  the  Romans  maintained  until  the  persecu- 
tion in  our  own  time,  he  writes  as  follows:  ''For  you  have 
from  the  beginning  this  custom  of  doing  good  in  different 
ways  to  all  the  brethren,  and  of  sending  suppHes  to  many 
churches  in  all  the  cities,  in  this  way  refreshing  the  poverty 
of  those  in  need,  and  helping  brethren  in  the  mines  with  the 
supplies  which  you  have  sent  from  the  beginning,  maintaining 
as  Romans  the  customs  of  the  Romans  handed  down  from 
the  fathers,  which  your  blessed  bishop  Soter  has  not  only 
kept  up,  but  also  increased,  helping  the  saints  with  the  abun- 
dant supply  he  sends  from  time  to  time,  and  with  blessed 
words  exhorting,  as  a  loving  father  his  children,  the  brethren 
who  come  up  to  the  city."  In  this  same  epistle  he  also  men- 
tions the  Epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians,  showing  that 
from  the  first  it  was  read  by  ancient  custom  before  the  Church. 
He  says,  therefore:  ''To-day,  then,  being  the  Lord's  day  we 
kept  holy;  in  which  we  read  your  letter;  for  reading  it  we 
shall  always  have  admonition,  as  also  from  the  former  one 
written  to  us  through  Clement."  Moreover,  the  same  writer 
speaks  of  his  own  epistles  as  having  been  falsified,  as  follows: 
"For  when  the  brethren  asked  me  to  write  letters,  I  wrote 
them.  And  these  the  apostles  of  the  devil  have  filled  with 
tares,  taking  away  some  things  and  adding  others.  For  them 
there  is  woe  in  store.  So  it  is  not  marvellous  that  some  have 
tried  to  falsify  even  the  dominical  scriptures  \i.  e.,  the  Holy 
Scriptures],  when  they  have  conspired  against  writings  of  an- 
other sort." 


CHILIASTIC  EXPECTATIONS  25 


§  10.    Chiliastic  Expectations 

Primitive  Christianity  was  marked  by  great  chiliastic  en- 
thusiasm, traces  of  which  may  be  found  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. By  chihasm,  strictly  speaking,  is  meant  the  belief 
that  Christ  was  to  return  to  earth  and  reign  visibly  for  one 
thousand  years.  That  return  was  commonly  placed  in  the 
immediate  future.  With  that  reign  was  connected  the  bodily 
resurrection  of  the  saints.  This  behef,  in  somewhat  varying 
form,  was  one  of  the  great  ethical  motives  in  apostoKc  and 
post-apostoHc  times.  It  was  a  part  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  Montanism.  It  disappeared  with  the  rise  of  a 
^'scientific  theology"  such  as  that  of  Alexandria,  the  ex- 
clusion of  Montanism,  and  the  changed  conception  of  the 
relation  of  the  Church  and  the  world,  due  to  the  lapse  of 
time  and  the  establishment  of  Christianity  as  the  religion 
of  the  State.  From  the  fourth  century  it  ceased  to  b  a 
Kving  doctrine. 

(a)  Papias,  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  39.    (MSG,  20  :  300.) 

Papias,  from  whom  two  selections  have  been  taken,  was  bishop  of 
HierapoHs  in  Phrygia  during  the  first  part  of  the  second  century.  He 
was,  therefore,  an  elder  contemporary  of  Justin  Martyr.  His  work, 
The  Exposition  of  the  Oracles  of  the  Lord,  has  perished,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  a  few  fragments.  The  comments  of  Eusebius  in  introducing 
the  quotations  of  Papias  are  characteristic  of  the  change  that  had  come 
over  the  Church  since  the  post-apostolic  period.  That  Papias  was  not 
to  be  regarded  as  a  man  of  small  power  simply  because  he  held  chiliastic 
ideas  is  sufficiently  refuted  by  the  fact  that  Justin  Martyr  falls  but 
little  behind  Papias  in  extravagance  of  expression. 

"I  shall  not  hesitate,  also,  to  set  in  order  for  you  with  my 
interpretations  whatsoever  things  I  have  ever  learned  care- 
fully from  the  elders  and  carefully  remembered,  guaranteeing 
the  truth  of  them.  .  .  .  For  I  did  not  think  that  what  was  to 
be  gotten  from  the  books  would  profit  me  as  much  as  what 
came  from  the  living  and  abiding  voice.  ..."  The  same 
writer  gives  also  other  accounts  which  he  says  came  to  him 


26  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

through  unwritten  traditions,  certain  strange  parables  and 
teachings  of  the  Saviour  and  some  other  more  mythical  things. 
Among  these  he  says  that  there  will  be  a  period  of  some 
thousand  years  after  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  when  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  will  be  set  up  in  a  material  form  on  this 
very  earth.  I  suppose  he  got  these  ideas  through  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  apostolic  accounts,  not  perceiving  that  the 
things  said  by  them  were  spoken  mystically  in  figures.  For 
he  appears  to  have  been  of  very  limited  understanding,  as 
one  can  see  from  his  discourses,  though  so  many  of  the  Church 
Fathers  after  him  adopted  a  like  opinion,  urging  in  their  sup- 
port the  antiquity  of  the  man;  as,  for  instance,  Irenaeus  and 
any  one  else  that  may  have  proclaimed  similar  views. 

(b)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcereses,  V,  33.     (MSG,  7  :  1213.) 

The  elders  who  saw  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  relate 
that  they  heard  from  him  how  the  Lord  used  to  teach  in 
regard  to  those  times,  and  say:  "The  days  will  come  in 
which  vines  shall  grow,  each  having  ten  thousand  branches, 
and  in  each  branch  ten  thousand  twigs,  and  in  each  twig  ten 
thousand  shoots,  and  in  each  one  of  the  shoots  ten  thousand 
clusters,  and  on  every  cluster  ten  thousand  grapes,  and  every 
grape  when  pressed  will  yield  five-and-twenty  metretes  of 
wine.  And  when  any  one  of  the  saints  shall  lay  hold  of  a 
cluster,  another  shall  cry  out,  'I  am  better  cluster,  take  me; 
bless  the  Lord  through  me. '  In  like  manner  [the  Lord  declared] 
that  a  grain  of  wheat  would  produce  ten  thousand  ears,  and 
that  every  ear  would  produce  ten  thousand  grains,  and  every 
grain  would  yield  ten  pounds  of  clear,  pure,  fine  flour;  and 
that  all  other  fruit-bearing  trees,  and  seeds  and  grass  would 
produce  similar  proportions,  and  that  all  animals  feeding  [only] 
on  the  productions  of  the  earth  would  [in  those  days]  become 
peaceful  and  harmonious  with  each  other  and  be  in  perfect 
subjection  to  men."  And  these  things  are  borne  witness  to  in 
writing  by  Papias,  the  hearer  of  John,  and  a  companion  of 
Polycarp,  in  his  fourth  book;  for  there  were  five  books  com- 


THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  WORLD      27 

piled  by  him.    And  he  says  in  addition:   "Now  these  things 
are  credible  to  believers." 

(c)  Justin  Martyr,  Dialogus  cum  Tryphone,  80  /.  (MSG, 
6:665.) 

Ch.  80.  Although  you  have  fallen  in  with  some  who  are 
called  Christians,  but  who  do  not  admit  this  truth  [the  resur- 
rection] and  venture  to  blaspheme  the  God  of  Abraham  and 
the  God  of  Isaac  and  the  God  of  Jacob, ^  and  who  say  that 
there  is  no  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  that  their  souls,  when 
they  die,  are  taken  to  heaven,  be  careful  not  to  regard  them 
as  Christians.  ...  But  I  and  whoever  are  on  all  points 
right-minded  Christians  know  that  there  will  be  a  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead  and  a  thousand  years  in  Jerusalem,  which  will 
then  be  built,  adorned,  and  enlarged  as  the  prophets  Ezekiel 
and  Isaiah  and  the  others  declare. 

Ch.  81.  And,  further,  a  certain  man  with  us,  named  Johr, 
one  of  the  Apostles  of  Christ,  predicted  by  a  revelation  that 
was  made  to  him  that  those  who  believed  in  our  Christ  woula 
spend  a  thousand  years  in  Jerusalem,  and  thereafter  the  gen- 
eral, or  to  speak  briefly,  the  eternal  resurrection  and  judgment 
of  all  men  would  likewise  take  place. 

§  II.    The  Church  and  the  World 

So  long  as  chiliastic  expectations  were  the  basis  of  the 
Christian's  hope  and  his  judgment  of  the  order  of  this  present 
world,  the  Christian  felt  that  he  was  but  a  stranger  and 
sojourner  in  the  world,  and  that  his  real  home  was  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  soon  to  be  estabhshed  here  on  earth.  With  such 
a  view  the  Christian  would  naturally  define  his  relation  to 
the  world  as  being  in  it,  yet  not  of  it.  As  time  passed,  the 
opinion  became  more  common  that  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
was  not  a  future  world-order  to  be  set  up  on  His  return,  but 
the  Church  here  on  earth.    This  thought,  which  is  the  key  to 

^  Such  were  evidently  Gnostics,  as  shown  by  their  rejection  of  the  God  of  the 
Jews. 


28  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

the  City  of  God  by  St.  Augustine,  was  not  to  be  found  in  the 
first  century  and  a  half  of  the  Church. 

Ep.  ad  Diognetum,  5,  6. 

The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  is  one  of  the  choicest  pieces  of  ante-Nicene 
literature.  Although  it  is  commonly  included  among  the  Apostolic 
Fathers,  the  date  is  uncertain,  it  is  anonymous,  and  the  reason  for  its 
inclusion  is  not  clear.  The  weight  of  opinion  is  in  favor  of  an  early 
date.  It  was  preserved  in  but  one  manuscript,  which  was  unfortunately 
destroyed  in  1870.  The  main  themes  of  the  epistle  are  the  faith  and 
manners  of  the  Christians,  and  an  attempt  to  explain  the  late  appear- 
ance of  Christianity  in  the  world.  The  work,  therefore,  is  of  the  nature 
of  an  apology,  and  should  be  compared  with  The  Apology  of  Aristides. 
A  translation  of  the  epistle  may  be  found  in  ANF,  I,  23. 

Ch.  5.  The  Christians  are  distinguished  from  other  men 
neither  by  country,  nor  language,  nor  the  customs  which  they 
observe.  For  they  neither  inhabit  cities  of  their  own,  nor 
employ  a  peculiar  form  of  speech,  nor  lead  a  life  which  is 
marked  out  by  any  singularity.  The  course  of  conduct  which 
they  follow  has  not  been  devised  by  any  speculation  or  delib- 
eration of  inquisitive  men;  nor  do  they,  like  some,  proclaim 
themselves  the  advocates  of  any  merely  human  doctrines. 
But,  inhabiting  Greek  as  well  as  barbarian  cities,  according 
as  the  lot  of  each  of  them  has  been  determined,  and  following 
the  customs  of  the  natives  in  respect  to  clothing,  food,  and 
the  rest  of  their  ordinary  conduct,  they  display  to  us  their 
wonderful  and  confessedly  striking  method  of  life.  They 
dwell  in  their  own  countries,  but  simply  as  sojourners.  As 
citizens,  they  share  in  all  things  with  others,  and  yet  endure 
all  things  as  if  foreigners.  Every  foreign  country  is  to  them 
as  their  native  land,  and  every  land  of  their  birth  as  a  land  of 
strangers.  They  marry  as  do  all;  they  beget  children;  but 
they  do  not  commit  abortion.  They  have  a  common  table, 
but  not  a  common  bed.  They  are  in  the  flesh,  but  they  do  not 
live  after  the  flesh.  They  pass  their  days  on  earth,  but  they 
are  the  citizens  of  heaven.  They  obey  the  prescribed  laws, 
and  at  the  same  time  surpass  the  laws  by  their  lives.  They 
love  all  men,  and  are  persecuted  by  all.    They  are  unknown 


THE  CHURCH  AND  THE  WORLD      29 

and  condemned;  they  are  put  to  death  and  restored  to  Kfe. 
They  are  poor,  yet  they  make  many  rich;  they  are  in  lack  of 
all  things,  and  yet  abound  in  all.  They  are  dishonored,  and 
yet  in  their  very  dishonor  are  glorified.  They  are  evil-spoken 
of,  and  yet  are  justified.  They  are  reviled  and  bless;  they  are 
insulted  and  repay  insult  with  honor;  they  do  good,  yet  are 
punished  as  evil-doers.  When  punished  they  rejoice  as  if 
quickened  into  Hf e ;  they  are  assailed  by  the  Jews  as  foreigners 
and  are  persecuted  by  the  Greeks;  yet  those  who  hate  them 
are  unable  to  assign  a  reason  for  their  hatred. 

Ch.  6.  What  the  soul  is  in  the  body,  that  the  Christians 
are  in  the  world.  The  soul  is  spread  through  all  the  members 
of  the  body,  and  Christians  through  the  cities  of  the  world. 
The  soul  dwells  in  the  body,  but  is  not  of  the  body;  so 
Christians  dwell  in  the  world,  but  they  are  not  of  the  world. 
The  invisible  soul  is  guarded  in  the  visible  body;  so  Chris- 
tians are  known  as  existing  in  the  world,  but  their  religioii 
remains  invisible.  The  flesh  hates  the  soul  and  wages  war 
on  it,  though  it  has  received  no  wrong,  because  it  is  forbidden 
to  indulge  in  pleasures;  so  the  world  hates  Christians,  though 
it  receives  no  wrong  from  them,  because  they  are  opposed 
to  its  pleasures.  The  soul  loves  the  flesh  which  hates  it,  and 
it  loves  the  members;  so  Christians  love  those  who  hate 
them.  The  soul  is  enclosed  in  the  body,  yet  itself  holds  the 
body  together;  so  the  Christians  are  kept  in  the  world  as  in 
a  prison-house,  yet  they  themselves  hold  the  world  together. 
The  immortal  soul  dwells  in  a  mortal  tabernacle;  so  Chris- 
tians sojourn  amid  corruptible  things,  looking  for  the  incor- 
ruptibihty  in  the  heavens.  The  soul  when  hardly  treated  in 
the  matter  of  meats  and  drinks  is  improved;  so  Christians 
when  punished  increase  more  and  more  daily.  In  so  great 
an  oflice  has  God  appointed  them,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for 
them  to  decline. 


so  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 


§  12.    Theological  Ideas 

In  the  post-apostolic  period  are  to  be  traced  the  begin- 
nings of  distinctive  forms  of  religious  and  ethical  ideas  as  dis- 
tinguished from  mere  repetition  of  New  Testament  phrases. 
The  most  influential  writer  was  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  the 
founder,  or  earhest  representative,  of  what  may  be  called  the 
Asia  Minor  theology,  which  is  to  be  traced  through  Irenseus, 
Methodius,  and  Athanasius  to  the  other  great  theologians 
of  the  Nicene  period,  becoming  the  distinctive  Eastern  type 
of  piety.  It  probably  persisted  in  Asia  Minor  after  Ignatius. 
Among  its  characteristic  features  was  the  thought  of  redemp- 
tion as  the  imparting  to  man  of  incorruptibility  through  the 
incarnation  and  the  sacraments. 

(a)  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad  Ephesios,  i8^. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  doctrinally  the  most  important  of 
the  writings  of  Ignatius.  In  the  passage  that  follows  there  is  a  re- 
markable anticipation  of  a  part  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  {cf.  Hahn,  §  i). 
The  whole  passage  contains  in  brief  the  fundamental  point  of  the 
writer's  teachings. 

Ch.  1 8.  My  spirit  is  an  ofTering^  of  the  cross,  which  is 
a  stumbling-block  to  unbelievers,  but  to  us  salvation  and 
life  eternal.  ^' Where  is  the  wise  man?  where  the  disputer?" 
[I  Cor.  I  :  2o.]  Where  is  the  boasting  of  those  called  prudent? 
For  our  God,  Jesus  Christ,  was,  according  to  the  dispensation 
of  God,  conceived  in  the  womb  of  Mary  of  the  seed  of  David, 
but  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  was  born  and  baptized,  that  by 
His  passion  He  might  purify  the  water. 

Ch.  19.  And  the  virginity  of  Mary  was  hidden  from  the 
Prince  of  this  World,  and  her  bringing  forth,  and  likewise  the 
death  of  the  Lord;  three  mysteries  of  shouting,  which  were 
wrought  in  silence  of  God.  How,  then,  was  He  manifested  to 
the  world?  A  star  shone  forth  from  heaven  above  all  other 
stars,  and  its  light  was  inexpressible,  while  its  novelty  struck 

^  Piaculum. 


THEOLOGICAL  IDEAS  31 

men  with  astonishment,  but  all  the  rest  of  the  stars,  with  the 
sun  and  moon,  formed  a  chorus  to  this  star,  and  its  light  was 
exceedingly  great  above  them  all.  And  there  was  agitation 
whence  this  novelty,  so  unlike  to  everything  else.  Hence 
every  kind  of  magic  was  destroyed  and  every  bond  of  wicked- 
ness disappeared;  ignorance  was  removed  and  the  old  king- 
dom aboHshed,  for  God  had  been  manifested  in  human  form 
for  the  renewal  of  eternal  Hfe.  And  now  that  took  a  beginning 
which  had  been  prepared  by  God.  Henceforth  all  things  were 
in  a  state  of  tumult  because  He  meditated  the  abolition  of 
death. 

Ch.  20.  ...  Especially  [will  I  write  again]  if  the  Lord 
make  known  to  me  that  ye  all,  man  by  man,  through  grace 
given  to  each,  agree  in  one  faith  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  who  was 
of  the  family  of  David  according  to  the  flesh,  the  Son  of  Man 
and  the  Son  of  God,  so  that  ye  obey  the  bishop  and  the  pres- 
bytery with  an  undivided  mind,  breaking  one  bread,  which 
is  the  medicine  of  immortality,  and  the  antidote  to  prevent 
dying,  but  which  is  hfe  forever  in  Jesus  Christ. 

(b)  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad  SmyrncBOS,  7. 

The  following  passage  may  be  regarded  as  a  parallel  to  part  of  the 
preceding  extract  from  the  same  writer's  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians. 

They  abstain  from  the  eucharist  and  from  prayer,  because 
they  confess  not  that  the  eucharist  is  the  flesh  of  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  which  sufTered  for  our  sins,  and  which  the 
Father,  of  His  goodness,  raised  up  again.  Those,  therefore, 
who  speak  against  this  gift  of  God,  die  while  disputing.  But 
it  were  better  for  them  to  love  it,  that  they  also  may  rise  again. 
It  is  fitting,  therefore,  that  ye  should  keep  aloof  from  such 
persons,  and  not  speak  of  them  either  in  private  or  public, 
but  to  give  heed  to  the  prophets  and,  above  all,  to  the  Gospel, 
in  which  the  passion  has  been  revealed  to  us  and  the  resur- 
rection fully  proved.  But  avoid  all  divisions  as  the  begin- 
ning of  evils. 

(c)  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad  Trallianos,  9,  10. 


32  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

The  heresy  which  the  writer  fears  is  that  known  as  Docetism,  which 
denied  the  reaUty  of  the  body  of  Jesus.  Reference  is  made  to  it  in  the 
New  Testament,  I  John  4:2.  It  was  based  upon  the  same  philosoph- 
ical idea  as  much  of  the  later  Gnostic  speculation,  that  matter  is 
essentially  evil,  and  therefore  a  pure  spirit  could  not  be  united  to  a 
real  body  composed  of  matter.  See  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers, 
pt.  II,  vol.  II,  p.  173/- 

Ch.  9.  Be  ye  therefore  deaf  when  any  one  speaks  to  you 
apart  from  Jesus  Christ,  who  was  of  the  race  of  David,  who 
was  born  of  Mary,  who  was  truly  born  and  ate  and  drank, 
who  was  truly  persecuted  under  Pontius  Pilate,  who  was  truly 
crucified  and  died  while  those  in  heaven  and  those  on  earth 
and  those  under  the  earth  looked  on;  who,  also,  was  truly 
raised  from  the  dead,  His  Father  having  raised  Him,  who  in 
like  fashion  will  raise  us  who  believe  in  Him;  His  Father, 
I  say,  will  raise  us  in  Christ  Jesus,  apart  from  whom  we  have 
not  true  life. 

Ch.  10.  But  if  it  were  as  certain  persons  who  are  godless, 
that  is,  unbelievers,  say,  that  He  only  appeared  to  suffer,  they 
themselves  being  only  in  appearance,  why  am  I  bound? 
And  why,  also,  do  I  desire  to  fight  with  wild  beasts?  I  there- 
fore die  in  vain.    Truly,  then,  I  lie  against  the  Lord. 

§  13.    Worship  in  the  Post- Apostolic  Period 

The  worship  of  the  Christian  Church  in  the  earliest  period 
centred  in  the  eucharist.  There  are  references  to  this  in  the 
New  Testament  {cf.  Acts  2  :  42;  20 :  7;  I  Cor.  10  :  16).  How 
far  the  agape  was  connected  with  the  eucharist  is  uncertain. 

Additional  source  material:  See  Pliny's  letter  to  Trajan  {v.  supra, 
§  7);  the  selections  from  Ignatius  already  given  {v.  supra,  §  12)  and 
the  Didache  {v.  infra,  §  14,  a). 

Justin  Martyr,  Apologia,  I,  61 :  65-67.  (MSG,  6  :  428  /.) 
Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  18. 

The  First  Apology  of  Justin  Martyr  was  written  probably  about 
150.  As  Justin's  work  is  dated,  and  is  of  indisputable  authenticity,  his 
account  of  the  early  worship  of  the  Christians  is  of  the  very  first  impor- 


WORSHIP  33 

tance.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that,  inasmuch  as  he  is  writing  for 
non-Christians,  he  uses  no  technical  terms  in  his  description,  and  there- 
fore nothing  can  be  determined  as  to  the  exact  significance  of  the  titles 
he  applies  to  the  presiding  officer  at  the  eucharist.  The  following 
passage  is  of  importance,  also,  as  a  witness  to  the  custom  of  reading, 
in  the  course  of  Christian  public  worship,  books  that  appear  to  be  the 
Gospels.  Irenaeus,  thirty  years  later,  limits  the  number  of  the  Gospels 
to  four,  V.  infra,  §  28.    On  the  eucharist,  v.  infra,  §  33. 

Ch.  61.  But  I  will  explain  the  manner  in  which  we  who 
have  been  made  new  through  Christ  have  also  dedicated  our- 
selves to  God,  lest  by  passing  it  over  I  should  seem  in  any  way 
to  be  unfair  in  my  explanation.  As  many  as  are  persuaded 
and  believe  that  the  things  are  true  which  are  taught  and  said 
by  us,  and  promise  that  they  are  able  to  live  accordingly, 
they  are  taught  to  pray  and  with  fasting  to  ask  God  forgive- 
ness of  their  former  sins,  while  we  pray  and  fast  with  them. 
Thereupon  they  are  brought  by  us  to  where  there  is  water, 
and  are  born  again  in  the  same  manner  of  a  new  birth  as  we, 
also,  ourselves  were  born  again.  For  in  the  name  of  God  the 
Father  and  Lord  of  all,  and  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  they  then  receive  the  washing  in  the  water. 
For  Christ  said:  ''Except  ye  be  born  again,  ye  shall  not  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  But  that  it  is  impossible  for 
those  once  born  to  enter  into  the  wombs  of  their  mothers  is 
manifest  to  all.  .  .  .  And  this  washing  is  called  enhghtenment, 
because  those  who  learn  these  things  have  their  understandings 
enlightened.  But,  also,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  who  was 
crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  and  in  the  name  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  who  by  the  prophets  foretold  all  things  pertaining  to 
Jesus,  he  who  is  illimiinated  is  washed. 

Ch.  65.  But  after  we  have  thus  washed  him  who  is  per- 
suaded and  has  assented,  we  bring  him  to  those  who  are  called 
the  brethren,  to  where  they  are  gathered  together,  making 
earnest  prayer  in  common  for  ourselves  and  for  him  who  is 
enlightened,  and  for  all  others  everywhere,  that  we  may  be 
accounted  worthy,  after  we  have  learned  the  truth,  by  our 
works    also    to    be    found   right   livers    and  keepers    of  the 


34  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

commandments,  that  we  may  be  saved  with  the  eternal  salva- 
tion. We  salute  each  other  with  a  kiss  when  we  conclude 
our  prayers.  Thereupon  to  the  president  of  the  brethren 
bread  and  a  cup  of  water  and  wine  are  brought,  and  he  takes 
it  and  offers  up  praise  and  glory  to  the  Father  of  the  uni- 
verse through  the  name  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
gives  thanks  at  length  that  we  have  been  accounted  worthy 
of  these  things  from  Him ;  and  when  he  has  ended  the  prayers 
and  thanksgiving  the  whole  people  present  assent,  saying 
"Amen."  Now  the  word  Amen  in  the  Hebrew  language 
signifies.  So  be  it.  Then  after  the  president  has  given  thanks 
and  all  the  people  have  assented,  those  who  are  called  by 
us  deacons  give  to  each  one  of  those  present  to  partake  of 
the  bread  and  of  the  wine  and  water  for  which  thanks  have 
been  given,  and  for  those  not  present  they  take  away  a 
portion. 

Ch.  66.  And  this  food  is  called  by  us  eucharist,  and  it  is 
not  lawful  for  any  man  to  partake  of  it  but  him  who  beHeves 
the  things  taught  by  us  to  be  true,  and  has  been  washed  with 
the  washing  which  is  for  the  remission  of  sins  and  unto  a  new 
birth,  and  is  so  living  as  Christ  commanded.  For  not  as 
common  bread  and  common  drink  do  we  receive  these;  but 
just  as  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  being  made  flesh  through 
the  word  of  God,  had  for  our  salvation  both  flesh  and  blood, 
so,  also,  we  are  taught  that  the  food  for  which  thanks  are  given 
by  the  word  of  prayer  which  is  from  Him,  and  from  which  by 
conversion  our  flesh  and  blood  are  nourished,  is  the  flesh  and 
blood  of  that  Jesus  who  was  made  flesh.  For  the  Apostles 
in  the  memoirs  composed  by  them,  which  are  called  Gospels, 
thus  delivered  what  was  commanded  them:  that  Jesus  took 
bread  and  gave  thanks  and  said.  This  do  in  remembrance  of 
Me,  this  is  My  body;  and  that  He  likewise  took  the  cup, 
and  when  He  had  given  thanks,  said.  This  is  My  blood,  and 
gave  only  to  them.  And  this  the  evil  demons  imitating,  com- 
manded it  to  be  done  also  in  the  mysteries  of  Mithras;  for 
that  bread  and  a  cup  of  water  are  set  forth  with  certain  ex- 


WORSHIP 


35 


planations  in  the  ceremonial  of  initiation,  you  either  know  or 
can  learn. 

Ch.  67.  But  we  afterward  always  remind  one  another  of 
these  things,  and  those  among  us  who  are  wealthy  help  all 
who  are  in  want,  and  we  always  remain  together.  And  for 
all  things  we  eat  we  bless  the  Maker  of  all  things  through  His 
Son  Jesus  Christ  and  through  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  on  the 
day  called  the  Day  of  the  Sun  there  is  a  gathering  in  one 
place  of  us  all  who  live  in  cities  or  in  the  country,  and  the 
memoirs  of  the  Apostles  or  the  writings  of  the  prophets  are 
read  as  long  as  time  allows.  Then,  when  the  reader  has  ceased, 
the  president  gives  by  word  of  mouth  his  admonition  and 
exhortation  to  imitate  these  excellent  things.  Afterward  we 
all  rise  at  once  and  offer  prayers;  and  as  I  said,  when  we  have 
ceased  to  pray,  bread  is  brought  and  wine  and  water,  and  the 
president  likewise  offers  up  prayers  and  thanksgivings  as  he 
has  the  ability,  and  the  people  assent,  saying  ''Amen."  The 
distribution  to  each  and  the  partaking  of  that  for  which  thanks 
were  given  then  take  place;  and  to  those  not  present  a  portion 
is  sent  by  the  hands  of  the  deacons.  Those  who  are  well-to-do 
and  willing  give,  every  one  giving  what  he  will,  according  to 
his  own  judgment,  and  the  collection  is  deposited  with  the 
president,  and  he  assists  orphans  and  widows,  and  those  who 
through  sickness  or  any  other  cause  are  in  want,  and  those 
who  are  in  bonds,  and  the  strangers  that  are  sojourning,  and, 
in  short,  he  has  the  care  of  all  that  are  in  need.  Now  we  all 
hold  our  common  meeting  on  the  Day  of  the  Sun,  because  it 
is  the  first  day  on  which  God,  having  changed  the  darkness 
and  matter,  created  the  world;  and  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour 
on  the  same  day  rose  from  the  dead.  For  on  the  day  before 
Saturn's  they  crucified  Him;  and  on  the  day  after  Saturn's, 
which  is  the  Day  of  the  Sun,  having  appeared  to  his  Apostles 
and  disciples,  He  taught  them  these  things  which  we  have 
offered  you  for  consideration. 


{ 

36  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

§  14.    Church  Organization 

No  subject  in  Church  history  has  been  more  hotly  discussed 
than  the  organization  of  the  primitive  Christian  Church. 
Each  of  several  Christian  confessions  have  attempted  to  jus- 
tify a  pohty  which  it  regarded  as  de  fide  by  appeal  to  the 
organization  of  the  Church  of  the  primitive  ages.  Since 
it  has  been  seen  that  the  admission  of  the  principle  of  devel- 
opment does  not  invalidate  claims  for  divine  warrant  for  a 
polity,  the  acrimonious  debate  has  been  somewhat  stilled. 
There  seems  to  have  been  in  the  Church  several  forms  of 
organization,  and  to  some  extent  the  various  contentions  of 
conflicting  creeds  and  poHties  have  been  therein  justified.  The 
ultimately  universal  form,  episcopacy,  may  in  some  parts  of 
the  Church  be  traced  to  the  end  of  the  apostoHc  age,  but  it 
seems  not  to  have  been  universally  diffused  at  that  time. 
Since  Christian  communities  sprang  up  without  official  prop- 
aganda, at  least  in  many  instances,  and  were  due  to  the 
work  of  independent  Christian  believers  moving  about  in  the 
Empire,  this  variety  of  organization  was  what  might  have  been 
expected,  especially  as  the  significance  of  the  organization 
was  first  felt  chiefly  in  connection  with  the  danger  from  her- 
esy. That  various  external  influences  affected  the  develop- 
ment is  also  highly  probable. 

(a)  Clement  of  Rome,  Ep.  ad  Corinthios,  I,  42,  44. 

Ch.  42.  The  Apostles  have  preached  the  Gospel  to  us 
from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  Jesus  Christ  was  sent  forth 
from  God.  Christ,  therefore,  was  from  God,  and  the  Apostles 
from  Christ.  Both  these  appointments,  then,  came  about  in 
an  orderly  way,  by  the  will  of  God.  Having,  therefore,  re- 
ceived their  orders,  and  being  fully  assured  by  the  resurrection 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  established  in  the  word  of  God, 
with  full  assurance  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  went  forth  pro- 
claiming that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  at  hand.  And  thus 
preaching  through  countries  and  cities,  they  appointed  their 


CHURCH  ORGANIZATION  37 

first-fruits,  having  proved  them  by  the  Spirit,  to  be  bishops 
and  deacons  of  those  who  should  afterward  believe.  Nor 
was  this  a  new  thing;  for,  indeed,  many  ages  before  it  was 
written  concerning  bishops  and  deacons.  For  thus  saith  the 
Scripture  in  a  certain  place:  ''I  will  appoint  their  bishops  in 
righteousness,  and  their  deacons  in  faith."  ^ 

Ch.  44.  Our  Apostles  also  knew,  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  that  there  would  be  strife  on  account  of  the  office  of 
the  episcopate.^  For  this  cause,  therefore,  inasmuch  as  they 
had  obtained  a  perfect  foreknowledge  of  this,  they  appointed 
those  already  mentioned,  and  afterward  gave  instructions 
that  when  these  should  fall  asleep  other  approved  men  should 
succeed  them  in  their  ministry.  We  are  of  the  opinion, 
therefore,  that  those  appointed  by  them,  or  afterward  by 
other  eminent  men,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole  Church, 
and  who  have  blamelessly  served  the  flock  of  Christ  in  lowli- 
ness of  mind,  peaceably,  and  with  all  modesty,  and  for  a  long 
time  have  borne  a  good  report  with  all — these  men  we  con- 
sider to  be  unjustly  thrust  out  of  their  ministrations.^  For 
it  will  be  no  Hght  sin  for  us,  if  we  thrust  out  those  who  have 
offered  the  gifts  of  the  bishop's  office  blamelessly  and  hoHly. 
Blessed  are  those  presbyters  who  have  gone  before  seeing 
their  departure  was  fruitful  and  ripe;  for  they  have  no  fear 
lest  any  one  should  remove  them  from  their  appointed  place. 
For  we  see  that  ye  have  displaced  certain  persons,  though 
they  were  living  honorably,  from  the  ministration  which  had 
been  honored  by  them  blamelessly. 

(b)  Didache,  7-15. 

The  Didache  is  a  very  early  manual  of  the  instruction  for  Christian 
converts.  It  consists  of  two  quite  distinct  parts,  viz.,  a  brief  account 
of  the  moral  law  (chapters  1-6) ,  which  appears  to  be  based  upon  a  Jewish 
original  to  which  the  name  of  The  Two  Ways  has  been  given,  and  a 

^  Clement  alters  the  passage  slightly;  see  Is.  60  :  17. 
-The  Greek  is  extaxoxT)  (episcope),  meaning  primarily  "oversight." 
3  This  seems  to  be  the  occasion  for  this  letter  to  the  Corinthians.    As  they 
appear  to  be  several,  they  correspond  to  presbyters  rather  than  to  bishops,  and 
the  use  of  the  term  "presbyters"  in  the  passage  sustains  this  interpretation. 


38  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

somewhat  longer  account  of  the  various  rites  of  the  Church  and  the 
regulations  governing  its  organization.  Its  date  is  in  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century  and  belongs  more  probably  to  the  first  quarter 
than  to  the  second.  It  is  a  document  of  first-class  importance,  espe- 
cially in  the  part  bearing  on  the  organization  of  the  Church,  which  is 
here  given.  The  extensive  Hterature  on  the  subject  may  be  found  in 
Kriiger,  op.  cit.,^  21. 

Ch.  7.  But  concerning  baptism,  thus  shall  ye  baptize. 
Having  first  recited  all  these  things,  baptize  in  the  name  of 
the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  living 
[i.  e.,  running]  water.  But  if  thou  hast  not  living  water,  then 
baptize  in  any  other  water;  and  if  thou  art  not  able  in  cold, 
in  warm.  But  if  thou  hast  neither,  pour  water  upon  the  head 
thrice  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  But  before  baptism  let  him  that  baptizeth  and 
him  that  is  baptized  fast,  and  any  others  also  who  are  able; 
and  thou  shalt  order  him  that  is  baptized  to  fast  a  day  or  two 
before. 

Ch.  8.  And  let  not  your  fastings  be  with  the  hypocrites. 
For  they  fast  on  the  second  and  the  fifth  days  of  the  week; 
but  do  ye  keep  your  fast  on  the  fourth  and  on  the  prepara- 
tion [i.  e.,  the  sixth  day].  Neither  pray  ye  as  the  hypocrites, 
but  as  the  Lord  commanded  in  His  Gospel,  thus  pray  ye: 
Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven,  hallowed  be  Thy  name;  Thy 
kingdom  come;  Thy  will  be  done,  as  in  heaven,  so  also  on 
earth;  give  us  this  day  our  daily ^  bread;  and  forgive  us 
our  debt,  as  we  also  forgive  our  debtors;  and  lead  us  not  into 
temptation,  but  deliver  us  from  the  Evil  One;  for  Thine  is 
the  power  and  the  glory  forever.^  Three  times  in  the  day 
pray  ye  so. 

Ch.  9.  But  as  regards  the  eucharist  [thanksgiving],  give 
ye  thanks  thus.  First,  as  regards  the  cup:  We  give  Thee 
thanks,  O  our  Father,  for  the  holy  vine  of  David,  Thy  Son, 
which  Thou  madest  known  unto  us  through  Jesus,  Thy  Son; 
Thine  is  the  glory  forever.     Then  as  regards  the  breaking 

*The  word  rendered  daily  is  Ixtouatov,  the  same  as  that  used  in  Matt.  6:ii. 
*  Note  the  doxology  also  at  the  end  of  the  other  prayers. 


CHURCH  ORGANIZATION  39 

[i.  e.,  of  the  bread]:  We  give  thanks  to  Thee,  0  our  Father, 
for  the  Hfe  and  knowledge  which  thou  madest  known  unto  us 
through  Jesus,  Thy  Son;  Thine  is  the  glory  forever.  As 
this  broken  bread  was  scattered  upon  the  mountains  and 
being  gathered  together  became  one,  so  may  Thy  Church  be 
gathered  together  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  into  Thy  king- 
dom; for  Thine  is  the  glory  and  the  power  through  Jesus 
Christ  for  ever  and  ever.  But  let  no  one  eat  or  drink  of  this 
eucharist  [thanksgiving]  but  they  that  have  been  baptized 
into  the  name  of  the  Lord;  for  concerning  this  also  the  Lord 
hath  said:   Give  not  that  which  is  holy  unto  the  dogs. 

Ch.  10.  After  ye  are  satisfied  give  thanks  thus:  We  give 
Thee  thanks.  Holy  Father,  for  Thy  holy  name,  which  Thou 
hast  made  to  tabernacle  in  our  hearts,  and  for  the  knowledge 
and  faith  and  immortality,  which  Thou  hast  made  known  unto 
us  through  Thy  Son  Jesus ;  Thine  is  the  glory  forever.  Thou, 
Almighty  Master,  created  all  things  for  Thy  name's  sake,  and 
gave  food  and  drink  unto  men  for  enjoyment,  that  they  might 
render  thanks  to  Thee;  but  bestowed  upon  us  spiritual  food 
and  drink  and  eternal  life  through  Thy  Son.  Before  all 
things  we  give  Thee  thanks  that  Thou  art  powerful;  Thine 
is  the  glory  forever.  Remember,  Lord,  Thy  Church  to  deliver 
it  from  all  evil  and  to  perfect  it  in  Thy  love;  and  gather  it 
together  from  the  four  winds — even  the  Church  which  has 
been  sanctified — into  Thy  kingdom  which  Thou  hast  pre- 
pared for  it;  for  Thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  forever. 
May  grace  come  and  may  this  world  pass  away.  Hosanna  to 
the  God  of  David.  If  any  one  is  holy,  let  him  come;  if  any 
one  is  not,  let  him  repent.  Maran  Atha.  Amen.  But  per- 
mit the  prophets  to  offer  thanksgiving  as  much  as  they  will. 

Ch.  II.  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  come  and  teach  you 
all  these  things  that  have  been  said  receive  him;  but  if  the 
teacher  himself  be  perverted  and  teach  a  different  doctrine 
to  the  destruction  thereof,  hear  him  not;  but  if  to  the  increase 
of  righteousness  and  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  receive  him  as 
the  Lord. 


40  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

But  concerning  the  apostles  and  prophets,  so  do  ye  accord- 
ing to  the  ordinance  of  the  Gospel :  Let  every  apostle  coming 
to  you  be  received  as  the  Lord;  but  he  shall  not  abide  more 
than  a  single  day,  or  if  there  be  need,  a  second  likewise;  but 
if  he  abide  three  days,  he  is  a  false  prophet.  And  when  he 
departs,  let  not  the  apostle  receive  anything  save  bread 
until  he  find  shelter;  but  if  he  ask  money,  he  is  a  false  prophet. 
And  any  prophet  speaking  in  the  Spirit  ye  shall  not  try, 
neither  discern;  for  every  sin  shall  be  forgiven,  but  this  sin 
shall  not  be  forgiven.  Yet  not  every  one  that  speaketh  in 
the  Spirit  is  a  prophet,  but  only  if  he  have  the  ways  of  the 
Lord.  From  his  ways,  therefore,  the  false  prophet  and  the 
[true]  prophet  shall  be  recognized.  And  no  prophet  when  he 
ordereth  a  table  in  the  Spirit  shall  eat  of  it;  otherwise  he  is 
a  false  prophet.^  And  every  prophet  teaching  the  truth,  if 
he  doeth  not  what  he  teacheth,  is  a  false  prophet.  And  every 
prophet  approved  and  found  true,  working  unto  a  worldly 
mystery  of  the  Church,^  and  yet  teacheth  not  to  do  what 
he  himself  doeth,  shall  not  be  judged  before  you;  he  hath  his 
judgment  in  the  presence  of  God;  for  in  like  manner  also 
did  the  ancient  prophets.  And  whosoever  shall  say  in  the 
Spirit,  Give  me  silver  or  anything  else,  do  not  Hsten  to  him; 
but  if  he  say  to  give  on  behalf  of  others  who  are  in  want,  let 
no  one  judge  him. 

Ch.  12.  But  let  every  one  coming  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
be  received;  and  when  ye  have  tested  him  ye  shall  know  him, 
for  ye  shall  have  understanding  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the 
left.  If  the  comer  is  a  traveller,  assist  him  as  ye  are  able;  but 
let  him  not  stay  with  you  but  for  two  or  three  days,  if  it  be 
necessary.  But  if  he  wishes  to  settle  with  you,  being  a  crafts- 
man, let  him  work  and  eat.    But  if  he  has  no  craft,  accord- 

1  The  sense  is:  If  a  prophet  speaking  in  the  Spirit  commands  a  meal  to  be 
prepared  for  the  poor  and  should  himself  eat  of  it,  it  would  be  apparent  that  he 
ordered  it  for  himself.    But  if  he  eats  he  must  be  a  false  prophet. 

2  A  most  difficult  and  obscure  passage.  Various  interpretations  have  been 
proposed;  see  the  various  editions  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  especially  Funk's. 
The  rendering  here  given  is  strictly  literal. 


CHURCH  ORGANIZATION  41 

ing  to  your  wisdom  provide  how  without  idleness  he  shall  live 
as  a  Christian  among  you.  If  he  will  not  do  this,  he  is  traffick- 
ing upon  Christ.    Beware  of  such  men. 

Ch.  13.  But  every  true  prophet  desiring  to  settle  among 
you  is  worthy  of  his  food.  In  like  manner,  a  true  teacher  is 
also  worthy,  Kke  the  workman,  of  his  food.  Every  first-fruit, 
then,  of  the  produce  of  the  wine- vat  and  of  the  threshing-floor, 
of  thy  oxen  and  of  thy  sheep,  thou  shalt  take  and  give  as  the 
first-fruit  to  the  prophets;  for  they  are  your  chief  priests. 
But  if  ye  have  not  a  prophet,  give  them  to  the  poor.  If  thou 
makes t  bread,  take  the  first-fruit  and  give  according  to  the 
commandment.  In  like  manner,  when  thou  openest  a  jar  of 
wine  or  oil,  take  the  first-fruit  and  give  to  the  prophets;  yea, 
and  of  money  and  raiment  and  every  possession  take  the  first- 
fruit,  as  shall  seem  good  to  thee,  and  give  according  to  the 
commandment. 

Ch.  14.  And  on  the  Lord's  day  gather  yourselves  together 
and  break  bread  and  give  thanks,  first  confessing  your  trans- 
gressions, that  your  sacrifice  may  be  pure.  And  let  no  man 
having  a  dispute  with  his  fellow  join  your  assembly  until 
they  have  been  reconciled,  that  your  sacrifice  may  not  be 
defiled;  for  this  is  the  sacrifice  spoken  of  by  the  Lord:  In 
every  place  and  at  every  time  offer  me  a  pure  sacrifice;  for  I 
am  a  great  king,  saith  the  Lord,  and  my  name  is  wonderful 
among  the  nations.     [Mai.  i  :  11,  14.] 

Ch.  15.  Appoint  [i.  e.,  lay  hands  on],  therefore,  for  your- 
selves bishops  and  deacons  worthy  of  the  Lord,  men  meek,  not 
lovers  of  money,  truthful,  and  approved;  for  they  also  render 
you  the  service  of  prophets  and  teachers.  Despise  them  not, 
therefore,  for  they  are  your  honored  ones  together  with  the 
prophets  and  teachers. 

(c)   Ignatius,  Ep.  ad  Trallianos,  2,  3. 
For  Ignatius,  see  §  8. 

Ch.  2.  For  since  ye  are  subject  to  the  bishop  as  Jesus  Christ, 
ye  appear  to  me  to  live  not  after  the  manner  of  men,  but 


42  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

according  to  Jesus  Christ,  who  died  for  us,  in  order  that  by 
believing  in  His  death  ye  may  escape  death.  It  is  therefore 
necessary  that  just  as  ye  indeed  do,  so  without  the  bishop 
ye  should  do  nothing,  but  should  also  be  subject  to  the  pres- 
bytery, as  to  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  Hope,  living 
in  whom  we  shall  be  found  [i.  e.,  at  the  last].  It  is  right,  also, 
that  the  deacons,  being  [ministers]  of  the  mysteries  of  Jesus 
Christ,  should  in  every  respect  be  well-pleasing  to  all.  For 
they  are  not  the  ministers  of  meats  and  drinks,  but  servants 
of  the  Church  of  God.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  that  they 
guard  themselves  from  all  grounds  of  accusation  as  they  would 
from  fire. 

Ch.  3.  In  like  manner,  let  all  reverence  the  deacons  as  Jesus 
Christ,  as  also  the  bishop,  who  is  a  type  of  the  Father,  and  the 
presbyters  as  the  sanhedrim  of  God  and  the  assembly  of  the 
Apostles.     Apart  from  these  there  is  no  Church. 

(d)   Ignatius,  Ep.  ad  SmyrncBos,  8. 

See  that  ye  follow  the  bishop  as  Jesus  Christ  does  the 
Father,  and  the  presbyters  as  ye  would  the  Apostles;  and  rev- 
erence the  deacons  as  a  commandment  of  God.  Without  the 
bishop  let  no  one  do  any  of  those  things  connected  with  the 
Church.  Let  that  be  deemed  a  proper  eucharist  which  is 
administered  either  by  the  bishop  or  by  him  to  whom  he  has 
intrusted  it.  Wherever  the  bishop  shall  appear  there  let 
also  the  multitude  be,  even  as  wherever  Jesus  Christ  is  there 
is  the  Catholic  Church.  It  is  not  lawful  without  the  bishop 
either  to  baptize  or  to  make  an  agape.  But  whatsoever  he 
shall  approve  that  is  also  pleasing  to  God,  so  that  everything 
that  is  done  may  be  secure  and  valid. 

§  15.    Church  Discipline 

The  Church  was  the  company  of  the  saints.  How  far,  then, 
could  the  Church  tolerate  in  its  midst  those  who  had  com- 
mitted serious  offences  against  the  moral  law?  A  case  had 
occurred  in  the  Corinthian  church  about  which  St.  Paul  had 


CHURCH  DISCIPLINE  43 

given  some  instructions  to  the  Christians  of  that  city  {cf. 
I  Cor.  5  13-5;  II  Cor.  13  :  10).  There  was  the  idea  current 
that  sins  after  baptism  admitted  of  no  pardon  and  involved 
permanent  exclusion  from  the  Church  {cj.  Heb.  10  :  26).  A 
distinction  was  also  made  as  to  sins  whereby  some  were 
regarded  as  "sins  unto  death"  and  not  admitting  of  pardon 
{cJ.  I  John  5:16).  In  principle,  the  exclusion  from  the  Church 
of  those  who  had  committed  gross  sins  was  recognized,  but 
as  the  Church  grew  it  soon  became  a  serious  question  as  to 
the  extent  to  which  this  strict  disciphne  could  be  enforced. 
We  find,  therefore,  a  well-defined  movement  toward  relaxing 
this  rigor  of  the  law.  The  beginning  appears  in  Hermas, 
who  admits  the  possibility  of  one  repentance  after  baptism. 
A  special  problem  was  presented  from  the  first  by  the  differ- 
ence between  the  conceptions  of  marriage  held  by  the  Chris- 
tians and  by  the  heathen.  The  Church  very  early  took  the 
position  that  marriage  in  some  sense  was  indissoluble,  that 
so  long  as  both  parties  to  a  marriage  lived,  neither  could 
marry  again,  but  after  the  death  of  one  party  the  surviving 
spouse  could  remarry,  although  this  second  marriage  was 
looked  upon  with  some  disfavor.  Both  the  idea  of  a  second 
repentance  and  the  idea  of  the  indissolubihty  of  marriage  are 
expressed  in  the  following  extract  from  Hermas: 

Hermas,  Pastor ^  Man.  IV,  1,3. 

Hermas  wrote  in  the  second  century.  Opinions  have  varied  as  to 
his  date,  some  putting  him  near  the  beginning,  some  near  the  middle 
of  the  century.  The  weight  of  opinion  seems  to  be  that  he  lived 
shortly  before  150.  His  work  entitled  The  Pastor  is  in  the  form  of 
revelations,  and  was  therefore  thought  to  partake  of  an  inspiration 
similar  to  that  of  Holy  Scripture.  This  naturally  gave  it  a  place 
among  Scriptures  for  a  while  and  accounts  for  the  great  popularity  of 
the  work  in  the  early  Church.  It  is  the  best  example  of  an  extensive 
apocalyptic  literature  which  flourished  in  the  Church  in  the  first  two 
centuries. 

Ch.  I.  If  the  husband  should  not  take  her  back  [i.  e.,  the 
penitent  wife  who  has  committed  adultery]  he  sins,  and 
brings  a  great  sin  upon  himself;    for  he  ought  to  take  back 


44  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

her  who  has  sinned  and  repented;  but  not  frequently;  for 
there  is  but  one  repentance  to  the  servants  of  God  [i.  e.,  after 
becoming  the  servants  of  God].  On  account  of  her  repent- 
ance [i.  e.,  because  she  may  repent,  and  therefore  should  be 
taken  back]  the  husband  ought  not  to  marry.  This  treatment 
applies  to  the  woman  and  to  the  man. 

Ch.  3.  And  I  said  to  him:  "I  should  like  to  continue  my 
questions."  ''Speak  on,"  said  he.  And  I  said:  "I  have 
heard,  sir,  from  some  teachers  that  there  is  no  other  repent- 
ance than  that  when  we  descend  into  the  water  and  receive 
remission  of  our  former  sins."  He  said  to  me:  ''Thou  hast 
well  heard,  for  so  it  is.  For  he  who  has  received  remission  of 
his  sins  ought  to  sin  no  more,  but  to  live  in  purity.  Since, 
however,  you  inquire  dihgently  into  all  things,  I  will  point 
out  this  also  to  you,  not  as  giving  occasion  for  error  to  those 
who  are  to  beheve,  or  have  lately  beheved,  in  the  Lord.  For 
those  who  have  now  believed  and  those  who  are  to  believe 
have  not  repentance  of  their  sins,  but  they  have  remission 
of  their  former  sins.  For  to  those  who  have  been  called  before 
these  days  the  Lord  has  set  repentance.  For  the  Lord,  who 
knows  the  heart  and  foreknows  all  things,  knew  the  weakness 
of  men  and  the  manifold  wiles  of  the  devil,  that  he  would 
inflict  some  evil  on  the  servants  of  God  and  would  act  wick- 
edly against  them.  The  Lord,  therefore,  being  merciful,  has 
had  mercy  on  the  works  of  His  hands  and  has  set  repentance 
for  them ;  and  has  intrusted  to  me  the  power  over  this  repent- 
ance. And  therefore  I  say  unto  you,"  he  said,  "that  if  after 
that  great  and  holy  calhng  any  one  is  tempted  by  the  devil 
and  sins,  he  has  one  repentance.  But  if  thereupon  he  should 
sin  and  then  repent,  to  such  a  man  his  repentance  is  of  no 
benefit;  for  with  difHculty  will  he  live."^ 

1  This  passage  is  quoted  at  length  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Stromata,  II,  12, 
13- 


MORAL  IDEAS  45 

§  16.    Moral  Ideas  in  the  Post-Apostolic  Period 

Christians  were  convinced  that  their  religion  made  the 
highest  possible  moral  demands  upon  them.  They  were  to 
live  in  the  world,  but  remain  uncontaminated  by  it  {cj. 
supra,  §  11).  This  belief  even  candid  heathen  were  sometimes 
forced  to  admit  {cf.  Pliny's  correspondence  with  Trajan, 
supra,  §  7).  The  morality  of  the  Christians  and  the  loftiness 
of  their  ethical  code  were  common  features  in  the  apologies 
which  began  to  appear  in  the  post-apostoHc  period  {cJ.  The 
A  pology  of  A  ristides,  infra,  §  20,  a) .  Christianity  was  a  revealed 
code  of  morals,  by  the  observance  of  which  men  might 
escape  the  fires  of  hell  and  obtain  the  bliss  of  immortality 
(a)  (cf.  infra,  §  30).  At  the  same  time  there  was  developed 
a  tendency  toward  asceticism,  by  which  a  higher  excellence 
might  be  obtained  than  the  law  required  of  ordinary  Chris- 
tians (b,  c).  This  higher  morahty  was  not  without  its  com- 
pensations; superior  merit  was  recognized  by  God,  and  was 
accordingly  rewarded;  it  might  even  be  appKed  to  offset  sins 
committed  {d,  e).  This  last  idea  is  to  be  traced  to  the  book 
of  Tobit  (cf.  also  James  5  :  20;  I  Peter  4:8).  The  fuller 
development  is  to  be  found  in  the  theology  of  Tertullian  and 
Cyprian  (y.  infra,  §  39). 

(a)  Justin  Martyr,  Apologia,  I,  10,  12.  (MSG,  6  :339,342.) 

Ch.  10.  We  have  received  by  tradition  that  God  does  not 
need  man's  material  offerings,  since  we  see  that  He  himself 
provides  all  things.  And  we  have  been  taught,  have  been 
convinced,  and  do  beheve  that  He  accepts  only  those  who 
imitate  the  virtues  which  reside  in  Him,  temperance  and  jus- 
tice and  philanthropy,  and  as  many  virtues  as  are  pecuhar 
to  a  God  who  is  called  by  no  given  name.  And  we  have-  been 
taught  that  He  in  the  beginning,  since  He  is  good,  did  for 
man's  sake  create  all  things  out  of  unformed  matter;  and  if 
men  by  their  works  show  themselves  worthy  of  His  design, 
they  are  deemed  worthy,  for  so  we  have  received,  of  reigning 


46  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

in  company  with  Him,  having  become  incorruptible  and  inca- 
pable of  suffering.  For  as  in  the  beginning  He  created  us 
when  we  were  not,  so  we  consider  that,  in  like  manner,  those 
who  choose  what  is  pleasing  to  Him  are,  on  account  of  their 
choice,  deemed  worthy  of  incorruption  and  of  fellowship  with 
Him.  For  the  coming  into  being  at  first  was  not  in  our  power; 
and  in  order  that  we  may  follow  those  things  which  please  Him, 
choosing  them  by  means  of  the  rational  faculties  with  which 
He  has  himself  endowed  us.  He  both  persuades  us  and  leads 
us  to  faith.  .  .  . 

Ch.  12.  And  more  than  all  other  men  are  we  your  helpers 
and  allies  in  promoting  peace;  for  we  are  of  the  opinion  that 
it  is  impossible  for  the  wicked,  or  the  covetous,  or  the  con- 
spirator, or  the  virtuous  to  escape  the  notice  of  God,  and 
that  each  man  goes  to  eternal  punishment  or  salvation 
according  to  the  deserts  of  his  actions.  For  if  all  men  knew 
this,  no  one  would  choose  wickedness,  even  for  a  little  time, 
knowing  that  he  goes  to  the  eternal  punishment  of  fire;  but 
he  would  in  every  respect  restrain  himself  and  adorn  himself 
with  virtue,  that  he  might  obtain  the  good  gifts  of  God  and 
escape  punishment.  For  those  who,  on  account  of  the  laws 
and  punishments  you  impose,  endeavor  when  they  offend  to 
escape  detection,  offend  thinking  that  it  is  possible  to  escape 
your  detection,  since  you  are  but  men;  but  if  they  learned 
and  were  convinced  that  it  is  not  possible  that  anything, 
whether  actually  done  or  only  intended,  should  escape  the 
notice  of  God,  they  would  five  decently  in  every  respect,  on 
account  of  the  penalties  threatened,  as  even  you  yourselves 
will  admit. 

(b)  Didache,  6.     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  13. 

See  that  no  one  cause  thee  to  err  from  this  way  of  the 
teaching,  since  apart  from  God  it  teacheth  thee.  For  if  thou 
art  able  to  bear  all  the  yoke  of  the  Lord,  thou  wilt  be  perfect; 
but  if  thou  art  not  able,  do  what  thou  art  able.  And  con- 
cerning foods,  bear  what  thou  art  able;  but  against  that  which 


MORAL  IDEAS  47 

is  sacrificed  to  idols  be  exceedingly  on  thy  guard;    for  it  is 
the  service  of  dead  gods. 

(c)  Hermas,  Pastor,  Man.  IV,  4. 

And  again  I  asked  him,  saying:  ''Sir,  since  you  haye  been 
so  patient  with  me,  will  you  show  me  this  also?"  "Speak," 
said  he.  And  I  said:  '' If  a  wife  or  husband  die,  and  the  widow 
or  widower  marry,  does  he  or  she  commit  sin?"  ''There  is 
no  sin  in  marrying  again,"  said  he;  "but  if  they  remain  un- 
married, they  gain  greater  honor  and  glory  with  the  Lord; 
but  if  they  marry,  they  do  not  sin.  Guard,  therefore,  your 
chastity  and  purity  and  you  will  Hve  to  God.  What  com- 
mandments I  now  give  you,  and  what  I  am  to  give  you,  keep 
from  henceforth,  yea,  from  the  very  day  when  you  were  in- 
trusted to  me,  and  I  will  dwell  in  your  house.  And  your 
former  sins  will  be  forgiven,  if  you  keep  my  commandments. 
And  to  all  there  is  forgiveness  if  they  keep  these  my  com- 
mandments and  walk  in  this  chastity." 

{d)  Clement  of  Rome,  Ep.  ad  Corinthios,  II,  4,  16. 

Ch.  4.  Let  us,  then,  not  call  Him  Lord,  for  that  will  not 
save  us.  For  He  saith:  "Not  every  one  that  saith  to  me, 
Lord,  Lord,  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  worketh  righteousness." 
Wherefore,  brethren,  let  us  confess  Him  by  our  works,  by  lov- 
ing one  another,  by  not  committing  adultery,  or  speaking  evil 
of  one  another,  or  cherishing  envy;  but  by  being  continent, 
compassionate,  and  good.  We  ought  also  to  sympathize  with 
one  another,  and  not  be  avaricious.  By  such  works  let  us 
confess  Him,  and  not  by  those  that  are  of  an  opposite  kind. 
And  it  is  not  fitting  that  we  should  fear  men,  but  rather  God. 
For  this  reason,  if  we  should  do  such  things,  the  Lord  hath 
said:  "Even  though  ye  were  gathered  together  to  me  in  my 
very  bosom,  yet  if  ye  were  not  to  keep  my  commandments,  I 
would  cast  you  off,  and  say  unto  you,  Depart  from  m.e;  I 
know  you  not,  whence  ye  are,  ye  workers  of  iniquity. "  ^ 

1  The  first  part  of  this  quotation  has  not  been  identified;   the  conclusion  is 
Matt.  7  :  23. 


48  POST-APOSTOLIC  AGE:  A.  D.  100-140 

Ch.  16.  So  then,  brethren,  having  received  no  small  occa- 
sion to  repent,  while  we  have  opportunity,  let  us  turn  to  God, 
who  called  us  while  we  yet  have  One  to  receive  us.  For  if 
we  renounce  these  indulgences  and  conquer  the  soul  by  not 
fulfilling  its  wicked  desires,  we  shall  be  partakers  of  the  mercy 
of  Jesus.  Know  ye  not  that  the  day  of  judgment  draweth 
nigh  like  a  burning  oven,  and  certain  of  the  heavens  and  all 
the  earth  will  melt,  like  lead  melting  in  fire;  and  then  will 
appear  the  hidden  and  manifest  deeds  of  men?  Good,  then, 
are  ahns  as  repentance  from  sin ;  better  is  fasting  than  prayer, 
and  ahns  than  both;  ^'charity  covereth  a  multitude  of  sins,'* 
and  prayer  out  of  a  good  conscience  delivereth  from  death. 
Blessed  is  every  one  that  shall  be  found  complete  in  these; 
for  alms  lighten  the  burden  of  sin. 

{e)  Hermas,  Pastor,  Sim.  V,  3. 

"If  you  do  anything  good  beyond  the  commandment  of 
God,  you  will  gain  for  yourself  more  abundant  glory,  and 
will  be  more  honored  before  God  than  you  would  otherwise 
be.  If,  therefore,  you  keep  the  commandments  of  God  and 
do  these  services,  you  will  have  joy  if  you  observe  them  accord- 
ing to  my  commandment."  I  said  unto  him:  "Sir,  what- 
soever you  command  me  I  will  observe;  for  I  know  that 
you  are  with  me."  "I  will  be  with  you,"  he  said,  "because 
you  have  such  a  desire  for  doing  good;  I  will  be  with  all  those," 
he  said,  "who  have  such  a  desire.  This  fasting,"  he  contin- 
ued, "is  very  good,  provided  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
be  observed.  Thus,  then,  shall  you  observe  the  fast  which 
you  intend  to  keep.  First  of  all,  be  on  your  guard  against 
every  evil  word  and  every  evil  desire,  and  purify  your  heart 
from  all  the  vanities  of  this  world.  If  you  guard  against 
these  things,  your  fasting  will  be  perfect.  But  do  thus:  having 
fulfilled  what  is  written,  during  the  day  on  which  you  fast 
you  will  taste  nothing  but  bread  and  water;  and  having 
reckoned  up  the  price  of  the  dishes  of  that  day  which  you 
intended  to  have  eaten,  you  will  give  it  to  a  widow,  an  orphan, 


MORAL  IDEAS  49 

or  to  some  one  in  want,  and  thus  you  will  be  humble-minded, 
so  that  he  who  has  received  benefit  from  your  humility  may 
fill  his  own  soul  and  pray  to  the  Lord  for  you.  If  you  observe 
fasting  as  I  have  commanded  you,  your  sacrifice  will  be 
acceptable  to  God,  and  this  fasting  will  be  written  down;  and 
the  service  thus  performed  is  noble  and  sacred  and  accept- 
able to  the  Lord." 


PERIOD  III 

THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140  TO  A.  D.  200 

The  interval  between  the  close  of  the  post-apostolic  age 
and  the  end  of  the  second  century,  or  from  about  140  to  200, 
may  be  called  the  Critical  Period  of  Ancient  Christianity. 
In  this  period  there  grew  up  conceptions  of  Christianity 
which  were  felt  by  the  Church,  as  a  whole,  to  be  fundamentally 
opposed  to  its  essential  spirit  and  to  constitute  a  serious 
menace  to  the  Christian  faith  as  it  had  been  commonly 
received.  These  conceptions,  which  grew  up  both  alongside 
of,  and  within  the  Church,  have  been  grouped  under  the 
term  Gnosticism,  a  generic  term  including  many  widely 
divergent  types  of  teaching  and  various  interpretations  of 
Christian  doctrine  in  the  light  of  Oriental  speculation.  There 
were  also  reactionary  and  reformatory  movements  which  were 
generally  felt  to  be  out  of  harmony  with  the  development 
upon  which  Christian  thought  and  life  had  already  entered; 
such  were  Montanism  and  Marcionism.  To  overcome  these 
tendencies  and  movements  the  Christian  churches  in  the 
various  parts  of  the  Roman  Empire  were  forced,  on  the  one 
hand,  to  develop  more  completely  such  ecclesiastical  institu- 
tions as  would  defend  what  was  commonly  regarded  as  the 
received  faith,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  pass  from  a  condi- 
tion in  which  the  various  Christian  communities  existed  in 
isolated  autonomy  to  some  form  of  organization  whereby  the 
spiritual  unity  of  the  Church  might  become  visible  and  better 
able  to  strengthen  the  several  members  of  that  Church  in 
dealing  with  theological  and  administrative  problems.  The 
Church,   accordingly,   acquired   in   the   Critical   Period   the 

so 


THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200  51 

fundamental  form  of  its  creed,  as  an  authoritative  expression 
of  beKef ;  the  episcopate,  as  a  universally  recognized  essential 
of  Church  organization  and  a  defence  of  tradition;  and  its 
canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  at  least  in  fundamentals,  as  the 
authoritative  primitive  witness  to  the  essential  teachings  of 
the  Church.  It  also  laid  the  foundations  of  the  concihar 
system,  and  the  bonds  of  corporate  unity  between  the  scat- 
tered communities  of  the  Church  were  defined  and  recognized. 
At  the  same  time,  the  Church  developed  in  its  conflict  with 
heathenism  an  apologetic  hterature,  and  in  its  conflict  with 
heresy  a  polemical  hterature,  in  which  are  to  be  found  the 
beginnings  of  its  theology  or  scientific  statement  of  Christian 
truth.  Of  this  theology  two  lines  of  development  are  to  be 
traced:  one  a  utilization  of  Greek  philosophy  which  arose 
from  the  Logos  doctrine  of  the  Apologists,  and  the  other  a 
reahstic  doctrine  of  redemption  which  grew  out  of  the  Asia 
Minor  type  of  Christian  teaching,  traces  of  which  are  to  be 
found  in  Ignatius  of  Antioch. 

CHAPTER  I.    THE  CHURCH  IN  RELATION  TO   THE   EM- 
PIRE AND  HEATHEN  CULTURE 

In  the  course  of  the  second  century  the  Church  spread 
rapidly  into  all  parts  of  the  Empire,  and  even  beyond.  It 
became  so  prominent  that  the  relation  of  the  Church  to 
heathen  thought  and  institutions  underwent  a  marked  change. 
Persecutions  of  Christians  became  more  frequent,  and  thereby 
the  popular  conviction  was  deepened  that  Christians  were 
malefactors.  To  some  extent  men  of  letters  began  to  notice 
the  new  faith  and  attack  it.  In  opposition  to  persecution  and 
criticism,  the  Church  developed  an  active  apologetic  or  de- 
fence of  Christianity  and  Christians  against  heathen  asper- 
sions. 

§  17.    The  Extension  of  Christianity. 
§  18.     Heathen  Rehgious  FeeHng  and  Culture  in  Relation 
to  Christianity. 


52  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

§  19.    Attitude  of  the  Roman  Government  toward  Chris- 
tians, A.  D.  138  to  A.  D.  192. 
§  20.     The  Literary  Defence  of   Christianity. 

§  17.    The  Extension  of  Christianity 

Under  the  head  of  Extension  of  Christianity  are  to  be  placed 
only  such  texts  as  may  be  regarded  as  evidence  for  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Church  in  a  well-defined  locahty.  It  is  apparent 
that  the  evidence  must  be  incomplete,  for  many  places  must 
have  received  the  Christian  faith  which  were  unknown  to  the 
writers  whose  works  we  have  or  which  they  had  no  occasion 
to  mention.  Rhetorical  overstatement  of  the  extension  of 
the  Church  was  a  natural  temptation  in  view  of  the  rapid 
spread  of  Christianity.  Each  text  needs  to  be  scrutinized 
and  its  merits  assessed.  It  should,  however,  be  borne  in  mind 
that  the  existence  of  a  well-established  church  in  any  locahty 
is  in  most  cases  sufficient  reason  for  believing  that  Christianity 
had  already  been  there  for  some  time.  In  this  way  valid 
historical  reasoning  carries  the  date  of  the  extension  of  the 
Church  to  a  locality  somewhat  further  back  than  does  the 
date  of  the  appearance  of  a  document  which  testifies  to  the 
existence  of  Christianity  in  a  definite  place  at  a  definite  time. 

(a)  TertulHan,  Adv.  Judceos,  7.     (MSL,  2  :  649.) 

Quintus  Septimius  Florens  Tertullianus  (circa  160-circa  220  A.  D.) 
is  the  most  important  ante-Nicene  Latin  ecclesiastical  writer.  He 
has  been  justly  regarded  as  the  founder  of  Latin  theology  and  the 
Christian  Latin  style.  His  work  is  divided  into  two  periods  by  his 
adherence  (between  202  and  207  A.  D.)  to  the  Montanistic  sect. 

The  treatise  Adversus  Judceos  probably  belongs  to  TertulHan 's  pre- 
Montanist  period,  though  formerly  placed  among  his  Montanist  writ- 
ings (see  Kriiger,  §  85,  6).  For  Geographical  references,  see  W.  Smith, 
Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Geography. 

Upon  whom  else  have  all  nations  believed  but  upon  the 
Christ  who  has  already  come?  For  whom  have  the  other 
nations  believed— Parthians,  Medes,  Elamites,  and  they  who 
inhabit  Mesopotamia,  Armenia,  Phrygia,   Cappadocia,  and 


THE  EXTENSION  OF   CHRISTIANITY  53 

those  dwelling  in  Pontus  and  Asia,  and  Pamphylia,  sojourners 
in  Egypt,  and  inhabitants  of  the  region  of  Africa  which  is 
beyond  Cyrene,  Romans  and  sojourners,  yes,  and  in  Jeru- 
salem, Jews  and  other  nations;^  as  now  the  varied  races  of 
the  Gsetuhans,  and  manifold  confines  of  the  Moors,  all  the 
limits  of  Spain,  and  the  diverse  nations  of  the  Gauls,  and  the 
places  of  the  Britons  inaccessible  to  the  Romans,  but  subju- 
gated to  Christ,  and  of  the  Sarmatians  and  Dacians,  and 
Germans  and  Scythians,  and  of  many  remote  nations  and 
provinces  and  many  islands  unknown  to  us  and  which  we  can 
hardly  enumerate?  In  all  of  these  places  the  name  of  Christ, 
who  has  already  come,  now  reigns. 

(b)  Tertullian,  Apologeticus  adversus  Gentes  pro  Christianis, 
37.     (MSL,  I  :  525.) 

The  date  of  this  work  is  197  A.  D. 

We  are  but  of  yesterday,  and  we  have  filled  every  place 
among  you — cities,  islands,  fortresses,  towns,  market-places, 
the  very  camps,  tribes,  companies,  palace,  Senate,  and  Forum. 
We  have  left  you  only  the  temples. 

(c)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcereses,  I,  10,  3.  (MSG,  7  :  551/.)  For 
text,  see  Kirch,  §  91. 

Since  the  Church  has  received  this  preaching  and  this  faith, 
as  we  have  said,  the  Church,  although  it  is  scattered  through- 
out the  whole  world,  diligently  guards  it  as  if  it  dwelt  in  one 
house;  and  likewise  it  beheves  these  things  as  if  it  had  one 
soul  and  one  heart,  and  harmoniously  it  preaches,  teaches, 
and  believes  these  things  as  if  possessing  one  mouth.  For 
although  the  languages  of  the  world  are  dissimilar,  yet  the 
import  of  the  tradition  is  one  and  the  same.  For  the  churches 
which  have  been  founded  in  Germany  have  not  beheved  nor 
handed  down  anything  different,  nor  have  those  among  the 
Iberians,  nor  those  among  the  Gauls,  nor  those  in  the  East, 

^Cf.  Acts  2:9/. 


54  THE   CRITICAL   PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

nor  those  in  Egypt,  nor  those  in  Libya,  nor  those  which  have 
been  established  in  the  central  regions^  of  the  world. 

(d)  Bardesanes,  De  Fato.  F.  Nau,  Bardesane  Vastrologue; 
le  livre  des  lois  des  pays,  Paris,  1899. 

Bardesanes  (154-222  A.  D.)  was  the  great  Christian  teacher  of 
Edessa.  He  lived  at  the  court  of  Abgar  IX  (179-214),  whom,  accord- 
ing to  a  doubtful  tradition,  he  is  said  to  have  converted.  The  entire 
book  may  be  found  well  translated  by  B.  P.  Pratten,  ANF,  VIII,  723- 
734. 

In  Syria  and  Edessa  men  used  to  part  with  their  manhood 
in  honor  of  Tharatha,^  but  when  King  Abgar  became  a  believer 
he  commanded  that  every  one  that  did  so  should  have  his 
hand  cut  off,  and  from  that  day  until  now  no  one  does  so  in 
the  country  of  Edessa. 

And  what  shall  we  say  of  the  new  race  of  us  Christians, 
whom  Christ  at  His  advent  planted  in  every  country  and  in 
every  region?  For,  lo,  wherever  we  are,  we  are  called  after 
the  one  name  of  Christ — namely.  Christians.  On  one  day, 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  we  assemble  ourselves  together,  and 
on  the  days  of  the  readings^  we  abstain  from  sustenance.  The 
brethren  who  are  in  Gaul  do  not  take  males  for  wives,  nor 
those  in  Parthia  two  wives;  nor  do  those  in  Judea  circumcise 
themselves;  nor  do  those  of  our  sisters  who  are  among  the 
Geli  consort  with  strangers;  nor  do  those  of  our  brethren  who 
are  in  Persia  take  their  daughters  for  wives;  nor  do  those 
who  are  in  Media  abandon  their  dead  or  bury  them  aHve  or 
give  them  as  food  to  the  dogs ;  nor  do  those  who  are  in  Edessa 
kill  their  wives  who  commit  adultery,  nor  their  sisters,  but  they 
withdraw  from  them,  and  give  them  over  to  the  judgment  of 
God ;  nor  do  those  who  are  in  Hatra  stone  thieves  to  death ; 
but  wherever  they  are,  and  in  whatever  place  they  are  found, 
the  laws  of  the  several  countries  do  not  hinder  them  from 
obeying  the  law  of  their  Christ;    nor  does  the  Fate  of  the 

^  Probably  Palestine  is  here  meant. 

2  The  great  Syrian  goddess  Atargatis.  ^  Reference  is  obscure. 


HEATHEN  RELIGIOUS  FEELING  55 

celestial  governors^  compel  them  to  make  use  of  the  things 
which  they  regard  as  impure. 

(e)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  10.     (MSG,  20  :  455.) 
Missions  in  the  extreme  East. 

They  say  that  Pantaenus  displayed  such  zeal  for  the  divine 
word  that  he  was  appointed  a  herald  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
to  the  nations  of  the  East  and  was  sent  as  far  as  India.^  For 
indeed  there  were  still  many  evangelists  of  the  word  who 
sought  earnestly  to  use  their  inspired  zeal,  after  the  example 
of  the  Apostles,  for  the  increase  and  building  up  of  the  divine 
word.  Pantaenus  was  one  of  these,  and  he  is  said  to  have  gone 
to  India.  The  report  is  that  among  persons  in  that  country 
who  knew  of  Christ  he  found  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew, 
which  had  anticipated  his  own  arrival.  For  Bartholomew,  one 
of  the  Apostles,  had  preached  to  them  and  left  them  the  writ- 
ing of  Matthew  in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  they  had  pre- 
served it  till  that  time. 

§  18.    Heathen  Religious  Feeling  and  Culture  in 
Relation  to  Christianity 

The  Christian  religion  in  the  course  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century  began  to  attract  the  attention  of  heathen 
writers;  it  became  an  object  of  literary  attack.  The  princi- 
pal literary  opponent  of  Christianity  was  Celsus,  who  sub- 
jected the  Christian  traditions  and  customs  to  a  searching 
criticism  to  prove  that  they  were  absurd,  unscientific,  and 
false.  Lucian,  of  Samosata,  does  not  seem  to  have  attacked 
Christianity  from  any  philosophical  or  religious  interest,  but 
treated  it  as  an  object  of  derision,  making  sport  of  it.    There 

^A  reference  to  astrological  doctrine. 

2  There  is  good  reason  for  believing  that  by  India  is  meant  what  is  now 
understood  as  India,  and  not  Arabia.  There  was  no  little  intercourse  between 
India  and  the  West,  and  we  have  the  direct  testimony  of  Dio  Chrysostom, 
circa  loo,  that  there  was  intercourse  between  Alexandria  and  India,  and  that 
Indians  came  to  Alexandria  to  study  in  the  schools  of  that  city.  See  DCB, 
art.  "  Pantaenus." 


56  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

were  also  in  circulation  innumerable  heathen  calumnies,  many 
of  the  most  abominable  character.  These  have  been  preserved 
only  by  Christian  writers.  It  was  chiefly  in  reference  to  these 
calumnies  that  the  Christian  apologists  wrote.  The  answer  to 
Celsus  made  by  Origen  belongs  to  a  later  period,  though 
Celsus  represents  the  best  philosophical  criticism  of  Chris- 
tianity of  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century. 

(a)  Celsus,  The  True  Word,  in  Origen,  Contra  Celsum. 
(MSG,  II  :65i/.) 

The  work  of  Celsus  against  Christianity,  or  The  True  Word,  written 
about  178,  is  lost,  but  it  has  been  so  incorporated  in  the  elaborate  reply 
of  Origen  that  it  can  be  reconstructed  without  much  difficulty.  This 
Theodor  Keim  has  done.  The  following  extracts  from  Origen's  Contra 
Celsum  are  quotations  from  Celsus  or  references  to  his  criticism  of 
Christianity.    For  Origen,  v.  infra,  §  43,  6. 

I,  I.  (MSG,  11:651.)  Wishing  to  throw  discredit  upon 
Christianity,  the  first  point  Celsus  brings  forward  is  that  the 
Christians  have  entered  secretly  into  associations  with  each 
other  which  are  forbidden  by  the  laws;  saying  that  ''of 
associations  some  are  public,  others  again  secret;  and  the 
former  are  permitted  by  the  laws;  the  latter  are  prohibited 
by  the  laws." 

I,  4.  (MSG,  II :  661.)  Let  us  notice,  also,  how  he  thinks  to 
cast  discredit  upon  our  system  of  morals  as  neither  venerable 
nor  a  new  branch  of  instruction,  inasmuch  as  it  is  common 
to  other  philosophers. 

I,  9.  (MSG,  II :  672.)  He  says  that  ''Certain  of  them  do 
not  wish  either  to  give  or  to  receive  reasons  for  those  things 
to  which  they  hold;  saying,  'Do  not  examine,  only  beheve  and 
your  faith  will  save  you!'";  and  he  alleges  that  such  also  say: 
"The  wisdom  of  this  life  is  bad,  but  fooHshness  is  a  good  thing." 

I,  38.  (MSG,  II  :  733.)  He  admits  somehow  the  miracles 
which  Jesus  wrought  and  by  means  of  which  He  induced  the 
multitude  to'  follow  Him  as  the  Christ.  He  wishes  to  throw 
discredit  on  them,  as  having  been  done  not  by  divine  power, 
but  by  help  of  magic,  for  he  says:  "That  he  [Jesus],  having 


HEATHEN  RELIGIOUS   FEELING  57 

been  brought  up  secretly  and  having  served  for  hire  in  Egypt^ 
and  then  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  certain  miraculous 
powers,  returned  from  thence,  and  by  means  of  those  powers 
proclaimed  himself  a  god." 

II,  55.  (MSG,  II :  884.)  ''Come,  now,  let  us  grant  to  you 
that  these  things  [the  prediction  made  by  Christ  of  His  resur- 
rection] were  said.  Yet  how  many  others  are  there  who  have 
used  such  wonders  to  deceive  their  simple  hearers,  and  who 
made  gain  of  their  deception?  Such  was  the  case,  they  say, 
with  Zalmoxis  in  Scythia,  the  slave  of  Pythagoras;  and  with 
Pythagoras  himself  in  Italy.  ...  But  the  point  to  be  con- 
sidered is,  whether  any  one  who  was  really  dead  ever  rose  with 
a  veritable  body.  Or  do  you  imagine  the  statements  of  others 
not  only  are  myths,  but  appear  as  such,  but  you  have  discov- 
ered a  becoming  and  credible  termination  of  your  drama,  the 
voice  from  the  cross  when  he  breathed  his  last,  the  earth- 
quake and  the  darkness?  that  while  living  he  was  of  no  help 
to  himself,  but  when  dead  he  rose  again,  and  showed  the 
marks  of  his  punishment  and  his  hands  as  they  had  been. 
Who  saw  this?  A  frantic  woman,  as  you.  state,  and,  if  any 
other,  perhaps  one  of  those  who  were  engaged  in  the  same 
delusion,  who,  owing  to  a  peculiar  state  of  mind,  had  either 
dreamed  so,  or  with  a  wandering  fancy  had  imagined  things  in 
accordance  with  his  own  wishes,  which  has  happened  in  the 
case  of  very  many;  or,  which  is  most  probable,  there  was 
some  one  who  desired  to  impress  the  others  with  this  portent, 
and  by  such  a  falsehood  to  furnish  an  occasion  to  other  jug- 
glers." 

II,  63.  (MSG,  II :  896.)  ''If  Jesus  desired  to  show  that 
his  power  was  really  divine,  he  ought  to  have  appeared  to 
those  who  had  ill-treated  him,  and  to  him  who  had  con- 
demned him,  and  to  all  men  universally." 

III,  59.  (MSG,  II  :  997.)  "That  I  bring  no  heavier  charge 
than  what  truth  requires,  let  any  one  judge  from  the  following. 
Those  who  invite  to  participation  in  other  mysteries  make 
proclamation  as  follows;  'Every  one  who  has  clean  hands  and 


58  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

a  prudent  tongue';  others  again  thus:  ^He  who  is  pure  from 
every  pollution,  and  whose  soul  is  conscious  of  no  evil,  and 
who  has  lived  well  and  justly.'  Such  is  the  proclamation  made 
by  those  who  promise  purification  from  sins.  But  let  us  hear 
whom  the  Christians  invite.  ^Whoever/  they  say,  ^is  a 
sinner,  whoever  is  devoid  of  understanding,  whoever  is  a 
child,'  and,  to  speak  generally,  'whoever  is  unfortunate,  him 
will  the  kingdom  of  God  receive.'  Do  you  not  call  him  a 
sinner,  then,  who  is  unjust  and  a  thief  and  a  house-breaker  and 
a  poisoner,  a  committer  of  sacrilege  and  a  robber  of  the  dead? 
Whom  else  would  a  man  invite  if  he  were  issuing  a  procla- 
mation for  an  assembly  of  robbers?" 

VII,  i8.  (MSG,  II :  1445.)  ''Will  they  not  again  make  this 
reflection:  If  the  prophets  of  the  God  of  the  Jews  foretold 
that  he  who  should  come  was  the  son  of  this  same  God,  how 
could  he  command  them  through  Moses  to  gather  wealth, 
to  rule,  to  fill  the  earth,  to  put  to  the  sword  their  enemies  from 
youth  up,  and  to  destroy  them  utterly,  which,  indeed,  he 
himself  did  in  the  eyes  of  the  Jews,  as  Moses  says,  threatening 
them,  moreover,  that  if  they  did  not  obey  his  commands  he 
would  treat  them  as  his  open  enemies;  whilst,  on  the  other 
hand,  his  son,  the  man  of  Nazareth,  promulgating  laws  in 
opposition  to  these,  declares  that  no  one  comes  to  the  Father 
who  is  rich  or  who  loves  power  or  seeks  after  wisdom  or  glory; 
that  men  ought  to  be  no  more  careful  in  providing  food  than 
the  ravens;  that  they  were  to  be  in  less  concern  about  their 
raiment  than  the  lilies;  that  to  him  who  has  smitten  them 
once  they  should  offer  opportunity  to  smite  again?  Is  it 
Moses  or  Jesus  who  lies?  Did  the  Father  when  he  sent  Jesus 
forget  the  things  he  commanded  Moses?  Or  did  he  change 
his  mind  and,  condemning  his  own  laws,  send  forth  a  messen- 
ger with  the  opposite  instructions?" 

V,  14.  (MSG,  II :  1 201.)  ''It  is  folly  for  them  to  suppose 
that  when  God,  as  if  he  were  a  cook,  introduces  the  fire,  all 
the  rest  of  the  human  race  will  be  burnt  up,  while  they  alone 
will  remain,  not  only  those  who  are  alive,  but  also  those  who 


HEATHEN  RELIGIOUS  FEELING  59 

have  been  dead  long  since,  which  latter  will  arise  from  the 
earth  clothed  with  the  self-same  flesh  as  during  Kf e ;  the  hope, 
to  speak  plainly,  of  worms.  For  what  sort  of  human  soul  is  it 
that  would  still  long  for  a  body  gone  to  corruption?  For  this 
reason,  also,  this  opinion  of  yours  is  not  shared  by  some  of  the 
Christians,^  and  they  pronounce  it  exceedingly  vile  and  loath- 
some and  impossible;  for  what  kind  of  body  is  that  which, 
after  being  completely  corrupted,  can  return  to  its  original 
nature,  and  to  that  self-same  first  condition  which  it  left? 
Having  nothing  to  reply,  they  betake  themselves  to  a  most 
absurd  refuge — that  all  things  are  possible  to  God.  But  God 
cannot  do  things  which  are  disgraceful,  nor  does  he  wish 
things  contrary  to  his  nature;  nor,  if  in  accordance  with  your 
wickedness  you  desire  something  shameful,  would  God  be 
able  to  do  it;  nor  must  you  believe  at  once  that  it  will  be  done. 
For  God  is  the  author,  not  of  inordinate  desires  nor  of  a  nature 
disordered  and  confused,  but  of  what  is  upright  and  just. 
For  the  soul,  indeed,  he  might  be  able  to  provide  everlasting 
life;  but  dead  bodies,  on  the  other  hand,  are,  as  Heraclitus 
observes,  more  worthless  than  dung.  So,  then,  God  neither  will 
nor  can  declare  contrary  to  reason  that  the  flesh  is  eternal, 
which  is  full  of  those  things  which  it  is  not  honorable  to  men- 
tion. For  he  is  the  reason  of  all  things  that  exist,  and  therefore 
can  do  nothing  either  contrary  to  reason  or  contrary  to  him- 
self.'^ 

(b)  Lucian  of  Samosata,  De  morte  Peregrini  Protei,  §§  11^. 
Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  20  Jff. 

Ch.  II.  About  this  time  he  made  himself  proficient  in  the 
marvellous  wisdom  of  the  Christians  by  associating  around 
Palestine  with  their  priests  and  scribes.  And  would  you  be- 
Heve  it?  In  a  short  time  he  convinced  them  that  they  were 
mere  children  and  himself  alone  a  prophet,  master  of  cere- 
monies, head  of  the  synagogue,  and  everything.  He  explained 
and  interpreted  some  of  their  books,  and  he  himself  also  wrote 

*  Probably  the  Gnostics. 


6o  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

many,  so  they  came  to  look  upon  him  almost  as  a  God,  made 
him  their  law-giver  and  chose  him  as  their  patron.  ...  At 
all  events,  they  still  worship  that  enchanter  [mage]  who  was 
crucified  in  Palestine  for  introducing  among  men  this  new 
reHgious  sect. 

Ch.  12.  Then  Proteus  was,  on  this  account,  seized  and 
thrown  into  prison,  and  this  very  circumstance  procured  for 
him  during  his  subsequent  career  no  small  renown  and  the 
reputation  for  wonderful  powers  and  the  glory  which  he 
loved.  When,  then,  he  had  been  put  in  bonds,  the  Christians 
looked  upon  these  things  as  a  misfortune  and  in  their  efforts 
to  secure  his  release  did  everything  in  their  power.  When 
this  proved  impracticable,  other  assistance  of  every  sort  was 
rendered  him,  not  occasionally,  but  with  zeal.  From  earhest 
dawn  old  women,  widows,  and  orphan  children  were  to  be 
seen  waiting  beside  the  prison,  and  men  of  rank  among  them 
slept  with  him  in  the  prison,  having  bribed  the  prison  guards. 
Then  they  were  accustomed  to  bring  in  all  kinds  of  viands, 
and  they  read  their  sacred  Scriptures  together,  and  the  most 
excellent  Peregrinus  (for  such  was  still  his  name)  was  styled 
by  them  a  New  Socrates. 

Ch.  13.  Certain  came  even  from  the  cities  of  Asia,  sent  by 
the  Christians  at  the  common  charge,  to  assist  and  plead  for 
him  and  comfort  him.  They  exhibit  extraordinary  activity 
whenever  any  such  thing  occurs  affecting  their  common  inter- 
est. In  short,  they  are  lavish  of  everything.  And  what  is 
more,  on  the  pretext  of  his  imprisonment,  many  contributions 
of  money  came  from  them  to  Peregrinus  at  that  time,  and  he 
made  no  little  income  out  of  it.  These  poor  men  have  per- 
suaded themselves  that  they  are  going  to  be  immortal  and 
live  forever;  they  both  despise  death  and  voluntarily  devote 
themselves  to  it;  at  least  most  of  them  do  so.  Moreover,  their 
law-giver  persuaded  them  that  they  were  all  brethren,  and 
that  when  once  they  come  out  and  reject  the  Greek  gods, 
they  should  then  worship  that  crucified  sophist  and  live 
according  to  his  laws.    Therefore  they  despise  all  things  and 


HEATHEN  RELIGIOUS   FEELING  6i 

hold  everything  in  common,  having  received  such  ideas  from 
others,  without  any  sufficient  basis  for  their  faith.  If,  then,  any 
impostor  or  trickster  who  knows  how  to  manage  things  came 
among  them,  he  soon  grew  rich,  imposing  on  these  foolish 
folk. 

Ch.  14.  Peregrinus  was,  however,  set  at  Hberty  by  the 
governor  of  Syria  at  that  time,  a  lover  of  philosophy,  who 
understood  his  folly  and  knew  that  he  would  wilHngly  have 
suffered  death  that  by  it  he  might  have  acquired  glory.  Think- 
ing him,  however,  not  worthy  of  so  honorable  an  end,  he  let 
him  go.  .  .  . 

Ch.  16.  A  second  time  he  left  his  country  to  wander  about, 
having  the  Christians  as  a  sufficient  source  of  supphes,  and 
he  was  cared  for  by  them  most  ungrudgingly.  Thus  he  was 
supported  for  some  time;  at  length,  having  offended  them  in 
some  way — he  was  seen,  I  believe,  eating  food  forbidden 
among  them — he  was  reduced  to  want,  and  he  thought  that 
he  would  have  to  demand  his  property  back  from  the  city;^ 
and  having  obtained  a  process  in  the  name  of  the  Emperor, 
he  expected  to  recover  it.  But  the  city  sent  messengers  to 
him,  and  nothing  was  done;  but  he  was  to  remain  where  he 
was,  and  to  this  he  agreed  for  once. 

(c)  Minucius  FeHx,  Odavius,  VIII,  3-10.     (MSL,  3  :  267/.) 

The  following  passage  is  taken  from  an  apologetic  dialogue  entitled 
Octavius.  Although  it  was  composed  by  a  Christian,  it  probably  rep- 
resents the  current  heathen  conceptions  of  Christianity  and  its  morals, 
especially  its  assemblies,  where  the  worst  excesses  were  supposed  to 
take  place.  In  the  dialogue  the  passage  is  put  into  the  mouth  of  the 
disputant  who  represents  the  heathen  objection  to  the  new  faith.  The 
date  is  difficult  to  determine,  probably  it  was  the  last  third  of  the 
second  century. 

Ch.  8.  ...  Is  it  not  lamentable  that  men  of  a  reprobate, 
unlawful,  and  dangerous  faction  should  rage  against  the 
gods?  From  the  lowest  dregs,  the  more  ignorant  and  women, 
credulous  and  3delding  on  account  of  the  heedlessness  of  their 

^  He  had  given  his  property  to  his  native  place. 


62  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

sex,  gathered  and  established  a  vast  and  wicked  conspiracy, 
bound  together  by  nightly  meetings  and  solemn  feasts  and  in- 
human meats — not  by  any  sacred  rites,  but  by  such  as  require 
expiation.  It  is  a  people  skulking  and  shunning  the  light;  in 
pubHc  silent,  but  in  corners  loquacious.  They  despise  the 
temples  as  charnel-houses;  they  reject  the  gods;  they  deride 
sacred  things.  While  they  are  wretched  themselves,  if  allowed 
they  pity  the  priests;  while  they  are  half  naked  themselves, 
they  despise  honors  and  purple  robes.  0  wonderful  folly  and 
incredible  effrontery!  They  despise  present  torments,  but 
fear  those  that  are  uncertain  and  in  the  future.  While  they 
fear  to  die  after  death,  for  the  present  life  they  do  not  fear 
to  die.  In  such  manner  does  a  deceitful  hope  soothe  their 
fear  with  the  solace  of  resuscitation. 

Ch.  9.  And  now,  as  wickeder  things  are  advancing  more 
successfully  and  abandoned  manners  are  creeping  on  day  by 
day,  those  foul  shrines  of  an  impious  assembly  are  increasing 
throughout  the  whole  world.  Assuredly  this  confederacy 
should  be  rooted  out  and  execrated.  They  know  one  another 
by  secret  marks  and  signs.  They  love  one  another  almost 
before  they  know  one  another.  Everywhere,  also,  there  is 
mingled  among  them  a  certain  religion  of  lust;  and  promis- 
cuously they  call  one  another  brother  and  sister,  so  that 
even  a  not  unusual  debauchery  might,  by  the  employment 
of  those  sacred  names,  become  incestuous.  It  is  thus  that  their 
vain  and  insane  superstition  glories  in  crimes.  Nor,  concern- 
ing these  matters,  would  intelligent  report  speak  of  things 
unless  there  was  the  highest  degree  of  truth,  and  varied  crimes 
of  the  worst  character  called,  from  a  sense  of  decency,  for  an 
apology.  I  hear  that  they  adore  the  head  of  an  ass,  that 
basest  of  creatures,  consecrated  by  I  know  not  what  silly 
persuasion — a  worthy  and  appropriate  religion  for  such  mor- 
als. Some  say  that  they  worship  the  genitaha  of  their  pontiff 
and  priest,  and  adore  the  nature,  as  it  were,  of  their  parent. 
I  know  not  whether  these  things  be  false;  certainly  suspicion 
has  place  in  the  case  of  secret  and  nocturnal  rites;    and  he 


HEATHEN  RELIGIOUS  FEELING  63 

who  explains  their  ceremonies  by  reference  to  a  man  punished 
by  extreme  suffering  for  wickedness,  and  to  the  deadly  wood 
of  the  cross,  bestows  fitting  altars  upon  reprobate  and  wicked 
men,  that  they  may  worship  what  they  deserve.  Now  the 
story  of  their  initiation  of  young  novices  is  as  detestable  as 
it  is  well  known.  An  infant  covered  with  meal,  so  as  to  deceive 
the  unwary,  is  placed  before  him  who  is  to  be  defiled  with 
their  rites;  this  infant  is  slain  with  dark  and  secret  wounds 
by  the  young  novice,  who  has  been  induced  to  strike  harmless 
blows,  as  it  were,  on  the  surface  of  the  meal.  Thirstily — 
O  horror! — they  lick  up  its  blood;  eagerly  they  divide  its 
limbs.  By  this  victim  they  are  confederated,  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  this  wickedness  they  are  pledged  to  a  mutual 
silence.  These  sacred  rites  are  more  foul  than  any  sort  of 
sacrilege.  And  of  their  banqueting  it  is  well  known  what 
is  said  everywhere;  even  the  speech  of  our  Cirtensian^  testifies 
to  it.  On  a  solemn  day  they  assemble  at  a  banquet  with  all 
their  children,  their  sisters  and  mothers,  people  of  every  sex  and 
age.  There,  after  much  feasting,  when  the  sense  of  fellowship 
has  waxed  warm  and  the  fervor  of  incestuous  lust  has  grown 
hot  with  drunkenness,  a  dog  that  has  been  tied  to  a  chandeHer 
is  provoked  to  rush  and  spring  about  by  throwing  a  piece  of 
offal  beyond  the  length  of  the  line  by  which  he  is  bound; 
and  thus  the  light,  as  if  conscious,  is  overturned  and  ex- 
tinguished in  shameless  darkness,  while  unions  of  abominable 
lust  involve  them  by  the  uncertainty  of  chance.  Although  if 
all  are  not  in  fact,  yet  all  are  in  their  conscience,  equally  in- 
cestuous ;  since  whatever  might  happen  by  the  act  of  the  indi- 
viduals is  sought  for  by  the  will  of  all. 

Ch.  10.  I  purposely  pass  over  many  things,  for  there  are 
too  many,  all  of  which,  or  the  greater  part  of  them,  the 
obscurity  of  their  vile  religion  declares  to  be  true.  For  why 
do  they  endeavor  with  such  pains  to  conceal  and  cloak  what- 
ever they  worship,  since  honorable  things  always  rejoice  in 
pubHcity,  but  crimes  are  kept  secret?     Why  have  they  no 

^  Fronto.    See  W.  Smith,  Diet,  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography. 


64  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

altars,  no  temples,  no  acknowledged  images?  Why  do  they 
never  speak  openly,  never  congregate  freely,  unless  it  be  for 
the  reason  that  what  they  adore  and  conceal  is  either  worthy 
of  punishment  or  is  something  to  be  ashamed  of?  Moreover, 
whence  or  who  is  he,  or  where  is  the  one  God,  solitary  and 
desolate,  whom  no  free  people,  no  kingdoms,  and  not  even 
Roman  superstition  have  known?  The  sole,  miserable  na- 
tionality of  the  Jews  worshipped  one  God,  and  one  pecuHar 
to  itself;  but  they  worshipped  him  openly,  with  temples, 
with  altars,  with  victims,  and  with  ceremonies;  and  he  has 
so  little  force  or  power  that  he  is  enslaved  together  with  his 
own  special  nation  to  the  Roman  deities.  But  the  Chris- 
tians, moreover,  what  wonders,  what  monstrosities,  do  they 
feign,  that  he  w^ho  is  their  God,  whom  they  can  neither  show 
nor  see,  inquires  diligently  into  the  conduct  of  all,  the  acts 
of  all,  and  even  into  their  words  and  secret  thoughts.  They 
would  have  him  running  about  everywhere,  and  everywhere 
present,  troublesome,  even  shamelessly  inquisitive,  since  he 
is  present  at  everything  that  is  done,  and  wanders  about  in 
all  places.  When  he  is  occupied  with  the  whole,  he  cannot 
give  attention  to  particulars;  or  when  occupied  with  partic- 
ulars, he  is  not  enough  for  the  whole.  Is  it  because  they 
threaten  the  whole  earth,  the  world  itself  and  all  its  stars, 
with  a  conflagration,  that  they  are  meditating  its  destruction? 
As  if  either  the  natural  and  eternal  order  constituted  by  the 
divine  laws  would  be  disturbed,  or,  when  the  league  of  the 
elements  has  been  broken  up  and  the  heavenly  structure 
dissolved,  that  fabric  in  which  it  is  contained  and  bound 
together  would  be  overthrown! 

§  19.    The  Attitude  of  the  Roman  Government  toward 
Christians,  A.  D.  138  to  A.  D.  192 

No  general  persecution  of  the  Christians  was  undertaken 
by  the  Roman  Government  during  the  second  century, 
though  Christians  were  not  infrequently  put  to  death  under 


ROMAN   GOVERNMENT  AND   CHRISTIANS     65 

the  existing  laws.  These  laws,  however,  were  by  no  means 
uniformly  carried  out.  The  most  sanguinary  persecutions 
were  generally  occasioned  by  mob  violence  and  may  be  com- 
pared to  modern  lynchings.  At  Lyons  and  Vienne,  in  Gaul, 
there  was  much  suffering  in  177.  The  letter  from  the  churches 
of  these  cities  to  the  Christians  in  Asia  and  Phrygia,  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec,  V,  I  (PNF,  ser.  I,  vol.  I,  211),  and  the  Martyrdom 
of  Polycarp  (ANF,  I,  37)  are  among  the  finest  pieces  of  Ht- 
erature  in  this  period  and  should  be  read  by  every  student. 
Under  Commodus  (180-193),  Marcia  seems  to  have  aided 
the  Christians  suffering  persecution.  The  Martyrdom  of 
Justin  may  be  found  ANF,  I,  303,  appended  to  his  works. 
The  doubtful  rescript  of  Hadrian  and  the  certainly  spurious 
rescript  of  Antoninus  Pius  may  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to 
Justin  Martyr's  works  (ANF,  I,  186),  and  in  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec,  IV,  9  and  13.  For  a  discussion  of  their  genuineness, 
see  McGiffert's  notes  to  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec.  The  original 
texts  may  be  found  in  Preuschen's  Analecta,  I,  §  6/. 

(a)  Justin  Martyr,  Apologia,  II,  2.     (MSG,  6:445.) 

The  martyrdom  of  Ptolomseus. 

A  certain  woman  had  been  converted  to  Christianity  by  Ptolomaeus. 
Her  dissolute  husband,  who  had  deserted  her  some  time  before,  was 
divorced  by  her  on  account  of  his  profligacy.  In  revenge  he  attempted 
to  injure  her,  but  she  sought  and  obtained  the  protection  of  the  im- 
perial courts.  The  husband  thereupon  turned  his  attack  upon  Ptolo- 
maeus. According  to  Ruinart,  the  martyrdom  took  place  in  166.  See 
DOB,  arts.  ''Ptolomasus"  and  "Justin  Martyr."  This  and  the  follow- 
ing martyrdoms  illustrate  the  procedure  of  the  courts  in  deaHng  with 
Christians. 

Since  he  was  no  longer  able  to  prosecute  her,  he  directed 
his  assaults  against  a  certain  Ptolomaeus  whom  Urbicus  pun- 
ished, and  who  had  been  the  teacher  of  the  woman  in  the 
Christian  doctrines.  And  he  did  this  in  the  following  way: 
He  persuaded  a  centurion,  his  friend,  who  had  cast  Ptolomaeus 
into  prison,  to  take  Ptolomaeus  and  interrogate  him  only  as 
to  whether  he  were  a  Christian.  And  Ptolomaeus,  being  a 
lover  of  the  truth,  and  not  of  deceitful  or  false  disposition, 


66         THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

when  he  confessed  himself  to  be  a  Christian,  was  thrown  in 
chains  by  the  centurion  and  for  a  long  time  was  punished  in 
prison.  At  last,  when  he  was  brought  to  Urbicus,  he  was 
asked  this  one  question  only:  whether  he  was  a  Christian. 
And  again,  conscious  of  the  noble  things  that  were  his  through 
the  teaching  of  Christ,  he  confessed  his  discipleship  in  the 
divine  virtue.  For  he  who  denies  anything  either  denies  it 
because  he  condemns  the  thing  itself  or  he  avoids  confession 
because  he  knows  his  own  unworthiness  or  alienation  from  it; 
neither  of  which  cases  is  that  of  a  true  Christian.  And  when 
Urbicus  ordered  him  to  be  led  away  to  punishment,  a  certain 
Lucius,  who  was  also  himself  a  Christian,  seeing  the  unreason- 
able judgment,  said  to  Urbicus:  ''What  is  the  ground  of  this 
judgment?  Why  have  you  punished  this  man:  not  as  an 
adulterer,  nor  fornicator,  nor  as  one  guilty  of  murder,  theft,  or 
robbery,  nor  convicted  of  any  crime  at  all,  but  who  has  only 
confessed  that  he  is  called  by  the  name  of  Christian?  You 
do  not  judge,  0  Urbicus,  as  becomes  the  Emperor  Pius,  nor 
the  philosopher,  the  son  of  Csesar,  nor  the  sacred  Senate." 
And  he,  replying  nothing  else  to  Lucius,  said:  ''You  also 
seem  to  me  to  be  such  an  one."  And  when  Lucius  an- 
swered, "Most  certainly  I  am,"  he  then  ordered  him  also 
to  be  led  away.  And  he  professed  his  thanks,  since  he  knew 
that  he  was  going  to  be  delivered  from  such  wicked  rulers 
and  was  going  to  the  Father  and  King  of  the  heavens. 
And  still  a  third  came  forward  and  was  condemned  to  be 
punished. 

(b)  Passion  of  the  Scilitan  Martyrs. 

Text:  J.  A.  Robinson,  Text  and  Studies,  I,  2,  112-116, 
Cambridge,  1891;  reprinted  in  R.  Knopf,  Ausgewdhlte  Mdr- 
tyreracten,  34^.,  Tubingen,  1901. 

The  date  of  this  martyrdom  is  July  17,  180  A.D.  Scili,  the  place  of 
residence  of  these  martyrs,  was  a  small  city  in  northwestern  Pro- 
consular Africa.  For  an  account  of  ancient  martyrologies,  see  Krii- 
ger,  §§  104  /. 


ROMAN  GOVERNMENT  AND   CHRISTIANS     67 

When  Praesens,  for  the  second  time,  and  Claudianus  were 
consuls,  on  the  seventeenth  day  of  July,  and  when  Spera- 
tus,  Nartzalus,  Cittinus,  Donata,  Secunda,  and  Vestia  were 
brought  into  the  judgment-hall  at  Carthage,  the  proconsul 
Saturninus  said:  Ye  can  win  the  indulgence  of  our  lord  the 
Emperor  if  ye  return  to  a  sound  mind. 

Speratus  said:  We  have  never  done  ill;  we  have  not  lent 
ourselves  to  wrong;  we  have  never  spoken  ill;  but  when  we 
have  received  ill  we  have  given  thanks,  because  we  pay  heed 
to  our  Emperor. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said:  We,  too,  are  religious,  and 
our  religion  is  simple;  and  we  swear  by  the  genius  of  our 
lord  the  Emperor,  and  pray  for  his  welfare,  which  also  ye, 
too,  ought  to  do. 

Speratus  said:  If  thou  wilt  peaceably  lend  me  thine  ears, 
I  will  tell  thee  the  mystery  of  simplicity. 

Saturninus  said :  I  will  not  lend  my  ears  to  thee,  when  thou 
beginnest  to  speak  evil  things  of  our  sacred  rites;  but  rather 
do  thou  swear  by  the  genius  of  our  lord  the  Emperor. 

Speratus  said:  The  empire  of  this  world  I  know  not;  but 
rather  I  serve  that  God  whom  no  man  hath  seen  nor  with 
these  eyes  can  see.  [I  Tim,  6:16.]  I  have  committed  no  theft; 
but  if  I  have  bought  anything  I  pay  the  tax;  because  I  know 
my  Lord,  the  King  of  kings  and  Emperor  of  all  nations. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said  to  the  rest:  Cease  to  be  of 
this  persuasion. 

Speratus  said:  It  is  an  ill  persuasion  to  do  murder,  to  bear 
false  witness. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said:  Be  not  partakers  of  this 
folly. 

Cittinus  said:  We  have  none  other  to  fear  except  only  our 
Lord  God,  who  is  in  heaven. 

Donata  said:  Honor  to  Caesar  as  Cssar,  but  fear  to  God. 
[Cf.  Rom.  13  :  7.] 

Vestia  said:   I  am  a  Christian. 

Secunda  said:  What  I  am  that  I  wish  to  be. 


68  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said  to  Speratus:  Dost  thou 
persist  in  being  a  Christian? 

Speratus  said:  I  am  a  Christian.  And  with  him  they  all 
agreed. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said:  Will  ye  have  a  space  to 
consider? 

Speratus  said:   In  a  matter  so  just  there  is  no  considering. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said:  What  are  the  things  in 
your  chest? 

Speratus  said:  Books  and  epistles  of  Paul,  a  just  man. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  said:  Have  a  delay  of  thirty 
days  and  bethink  yourselves. 

Speratus  said  a  second  time:  I  am  a  Christian.  And  with 
him  all  agreed. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  read  out  the  decree  from  the 
tablet:  Speratus,  Nartzalus,  Cittinus,  Donata,  Vestia,  Se- 
cunda,  and  the  rest  who  have  confessed  that  they  live  accord- 
ing to  the  Christian  rite  because  an  opportunity  has  been 
offered  them  of  returning  to  the  custom  of  the  Romans  and 
they  have  obstinately  persisted,  it  is  determined  shall  be 
put  to  the  sword. 

Speratus  said:  We  give  thanks  to  God. 

Nartzalus  said:  To-day  we  are  martyrs  in  heaven;  thanks 
be  to  God. 

Saturninus,  the  proconsul,  ordered  it  to  be  proclaimed  by 
the  herald:  Speratus,  Nartzalus,  Cittinus,  Veturius,  Felix, 
Aquilinus,  Laetatius,  Januaria,  Generosa,  Vestia,  Donata,  and 
Secunda  I  have  ordered  to  be  executed. 

They  all  said:  Thanks  be  to  God. 

And  so  they  all  at  one  time  were  crowned  with  martyrdom; 
and  they  reign  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  forever  and  ever.     Amen. 

(c)  Hippolytus,  Refutatio  omnium  Hceresium,  X,  7.  (MSG, 
16:3382.) 

Hippolytus,  a  Greek  writer  of  the  West,  lived  at  Rome  in  the  time 
of  Zephyrinus  (198-217)  and  until  shortly  after  A.  D.  235.     He  ap- 


LITERARY  DEFENCE  OF   CHRISTIANITY      69 

pears  to  have  been  consecrated  bishop  of  a  schismatical  party  in 
Rome.  Of  his  numerous  works  many  have  been  lost  in  whole  or  in 
part.  The  Philosophumejia,  or  the  Refutation  of  All  Heresies,  was  lost, 
with  the  exception  of  the  first  book,  until  1842,  and  was  then  pubHshed 
among  the  works  of  Origen.  It  is  of  importance  as  giving  much  material 
for  the  study  of  Gnosticism.  It  may  be  found  as  a  whole  translated 
in  ANF,  V. 

But  after  a  time,  when  other  martyrs  were  there  [i.  e.,  in  the 
mines  in  Sardinia],  Marcia,  the  pious  concubine  of  Commodus, 
wishing  to  perform  some  good  deed,  called  before  her  the 
blessed  Victor  [i93?-202],  at  that  time  bishop  of  the  Church, 
and  inquired  of  him  what  martyrs  were  in  Sardinia.  And 
he  deHvered  to  her  the  names  of  all,  but  did  not  give  the 
name  of  CalHstus,  knowing  what  things  had  been  attempted 
by  him.  Marcia,  having  obtained  her  request  from  Com- 
modus, hands  the  letter  of  emancipation  to  Hyacinthus,  a 
certain  eunuch  rather  advanced  in  Hfe  [or  a  presbyter],  who, 
receiving  it,  sailed  away  to  Sardinia.  He  dehvered  the  letter 
to  the  person  who  at  that  time  was  governor  of  the  territory, 
and  he  released  the  martyrs,  with  the  exception  of  CalHstus. 

§  20.    The  Literary  Defence  of  Christianity 

In  reply  to  the  attacks  made  upon  Christianity,  the  apol- 
ogists defended  their  religion  along  three  lines:  It  was 
philosophically  justified;  it  was  true;  it  did  not  favor  immo- 
raHty,  but,  on  the  contrary,  inculcated  virtue.  The  philo- 
sophical defence,  or  justification,  of  Christianity  was  most 
brilliantly  undertaken  by  Justin  Martyr,  who  employed  the 
current  philosophical  conception  of  the  Logos.  The  general 
proof  of  Christianity  was  chiefly  based  upon  the  argument 
from  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy.  All  apologists  undertook  to 
show  that  the  heathen  calumnies  against  the  Christians  were 
false,  that  the  heathen  religions  were  replete  with  obscene  tales 
of  the  gods,  and  that  the  worship  of  idols  was  absurd. 

(a)  Aristides,  Apology,  2,  13,  15,  16.  Ed.  J.  R.  Harris  and 
J,  A.  Robinson,  Texts  and  Studies,  I,  i,  Cambridge,  1891. 


70         THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A,  D.  140-200 

The  Apology  of  Aristides  was  long  lost,  but  was  found  in  a  Syriac 
version  in  1889.  It  was  then  found  that  much  of  the  Greek  original 
had  been  incorporated  in  the  Life  of  Barlaam  and  Josaphat,  a  popular 
religious  romance  of  the  Middle  Ages;  see  the  introduction  to  the 
parallel  translations  by  D.  H.  McKay  in  ANF,  vol.  IX,  259-279. 
This  work  of  Aristides  may  be  as  early  as  125;  if  so,  it  disputes  with 
the  similar  work  of  Quadratus  the  honor  of  being  the  first  Christian 
apology.  A  large  part  of  it  is  taken  up  with  a  statement  of  the  con- 
tradictions and  absurdities  of  the  mythology  of  the  Greeks  and  Bar- 
barians. Of  this  statement,  ch.  13,  quoted  below,  is  the  conclusion. 
Then,  after  a  short  passage  regarding  the  Jews,  the  author  passes  to 
an  exposition  of  the  faith  of  Christians  and  a  statement  regarding 
their  high  morality. 

Ch.  2.  [Found  only  in  Syriac]  The  Christians  trace  the 
beginning  of  their  religion  to  Jesus  the  Messiah;  and  He  is 
named  the  Son  of  the  most  high  God.  And  it  is  said  that 
God  came  down  from  heaven  and  from  a  Hebrew  virgin 
assumed  and  clothed  Himself  with  flesh,  and  that  the  Son 
of  God  lived  in  a  daughter  of  man.  This  is  taught  in  that 
Gospel  which,  as  is  related  among  them,  was  preached 
among  them  a  short  time  ago.  And  you,  also,  if  you  will  read 
therein,  may  perceive  the  power  that  belongs  to  it.  This 
Jesus,  therefore,  was  born  of  the  race  of  the  Hebrews.  He 
had  twelve  disciples,  that  His  wonderful  plan  of  salvation 
might  be  carried  out.  But  He  himself  was  pierced  by  the 
Jews,  and  He  died  and  He  was  buried.  And  they  say  that 
after  three  days  He  rose  and  was  raised  to  heaven.  Thereupon 
those  twelve  disciples  went  forth  into  the  known  parts  of 
the  world,  and  with  all  modesty  and  uprightness  taught  con- 
cerning His  greatness.  And  therefore  also  those  at  the  present 
time  who  now  beheve  that  preaching  are  called  Christians 
and  they  are  known. 

Ch.  13.  When  the  Greeks  made  laws  they  did  not  perceive 
that  by  their  laws  they  condemned  their  gods.  For  if  their 
laws  are  righteous,  their  gods  are  unrighteous,  because  they 
committed  transgressions  of  the  law  in  that  they  killed  one 
another,  practised  sorcery,  and  committed  adultery,  robbed, 
stole,  and  lay  with  males,  not  to  mention  their  other  prac- 


LITERARY  DEFENCE  OF   CHRISTIANITY      71 

tices.  For  if  their  gods  have  done  right  in  doing  all  this,  as 
they  write,  then  the  laws  of  the  Greeks  are  unrighteous  in 
not  being  made  according  to  the  will  of  their  gods.  And  con- 
sequently the  whole  world  has  gone  astray. 

Ch.  15.  The  Christians,  0  King,  in  that  they  go  about  and 
seek  the  truth,  have  found  it  and,  as  we  have  understood  from 
their  writings,  they  have  come  much  nearer  to  the  truth  and 
correct  knowledge  than  have  the  other  peoples.  They  know 
and  trust  God,  the  creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  in  whom  are 
all  things  and  from  whom  are  all  things,  in  Him  who  has  no 
other  God  beside  Him,  in  Him  from  whom  they  have  received 
commandments  which  they  have  engraved  upon  their  minds, 
commandments  which  they  observe  in  the  faith  and  expec- 
tation of  the  world  to  come.  Wherefore  they  do  not  com- 
mit adultery  or  fornication,  nor  bear  false  witness,  nor  covet 
what  is  held  in  pledge,  nor  covet  what  is  not  theirs.  They 
honor  father  and  mother  and  show  kindness  to  their  neighbors. 
If  they  are  judges,  they  judge  uprightly.  They  do  not  wor- 
ship idols  made  in  human  form.  And  whatsoever  they  would 
not  that  others  should  do  unto  them,  they  do  not  to  others. 
They  do  not  eat  of  food  offered  to  idols,  because  they  are  pure. 
And  their  oppressors  they  appease  and  they  make  friends  of 
them;  they  do  good  to  their  enemies.  ...  If  they  see  a 
stranger,  they  take  him  to  their  dwellings  and  rejoice  over 
him  as  ovej;  a  real  brother.  For  they  do  not  call  themselves 
brethren  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit  and  in  God. 
But  if  one  of  their  poor  passes  from  the  world,  each  one  of 
them  who  sees  him  cares  for  his  burial  according  to  his  ability. 
And  if  they  hear  that  one  of  them  is  imprisoned  or  oppressed 
on  account  of  the  name  of  their  Messiah,  all  of  them  care  for 
his  necessity,  and  if  it  is  possible  to  redeem  him,  they  set 
him  free.  And  if  any  one  among  them  is  poor  and  needy, 
and  they  have  no  spare  food,  they  fast  two  or  three  days  in 
order  to  supply  him  with  the  needed  food.^  The  precepts  of 
their  Messiah  they  observe  with  great  care.    They  live  justly 

^Cj.  Hennas,  Pastor,  Sim.  V,  3.     ANF,  II,  34. 


72  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

and  soberly,  as  the  Lord  their  God  commanded  them.  Every 
morning  and  every  hour  they  acknowledge  and  praise  God 
for  His  lovingkindnesses  toward  them,  and  for  their  food  and 
drink  they  give  thanks  to  Him.  And  if  any  righteous  man 
among  them  passes  from  this  world,  they  rejoice  and  thank 
God  and  they  escort  his  body  as  if  he  were  setting  out  on  a 
journey  from  one  place  to  another.  .  .  . 

Ch.  1 6.  ...  Their  words  and  precepts,  O  King,  and  the 
glory  of  their  worship  and  their  hope  of  receiving  reward, 
which  they  look  for  in  another  world,  according  to  the  work 
of  each  one,  you  can  learn  about  from  their  writings.  It  is 
enough  for  us  to  have  informed  your  Majesty  in  a  few  words 
concerning  the  conduct  and  truth  of  the  Christians.  For 
great,  indeed,  and  wonderful  is  their  doctrine  for  him  who  will 
study  it  and  reflect  upon  it.  And  verily  this  is  a  new  people, 
and  there  is  something  divine  in  it. 

(b)  Justin  Martyr,  Apologia,  I,  46.     (MSG,  6  :  398.) 

In  the  following,  Justin  Martyr  states  his  argument  from  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Logos,  which  was  widely  accepted  in  Greek  philosophy 
and  found  its  counterpart  in  Christianity  in  the  Johannine  theology 
(see  below,  §  32  a).  With  Justin  should  be  compared  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria (see  below,  §  43  a),  who  develops  the  same  idea  in  showing  the 
relation  of  Greek  philosophy  to  the  Mosaic  dispensation  and  to  the 
Christian  revelation. 

We  have  been  taught  that  Christ  is  the  first-born  of  God, 
and  we  have  declared  above  that  He  is  the  Word  of  whom 
every  race  of  men  partake;  and  those  who  Hved  reasonably 
were  Christians,  even  though  they  have  been  thought  atheists; 
as  among  the  Greeks,  Socrates  and  HeracHtus  and  those  like 
them;  and  among  the  Barbarians,  Abraham  and  Ananias, 
and  Azarias,  and  Misael,  and  Elias,  and  many  others  whose 
actions  and  names  we  now  decline  to  recount,  because  we 
know  it  would  be  tedious. 

(c)  Justin  MsiYtyr,  Apologia,  II,  10, 13.    (MSG,  6  :  459,  466.) 

Ch.  10.  Our  doctrines,  then,  appear  to  be  greater  than  all 
human  teaching;  because  Christ  who  appeared  for  our  sakes, 


LITERARY  DEFENCE   OF   CHRISTIANITY      73 

became  the  whole  rational  being,^  body  and  reason  and  soul. 
For  whatever  either  law-givers  or  philosophers  uttered  well 
they  elaborated  by  finding  and  contemplating  some  part  of 
the  Logos.  But  since  they  did  not  know  the  whole  of  the 
Logos,  which  is  Christ,  they  often  contradicted  themselves. 
And  those  who  by  human  birth  were  more  ancient  than  Christ, 
when  they  attempted  to  consider  and  prove  things  by  reason, 
were  brought  before  the  tribunals  as  impious  persons  and  busy- 
bodies.  And  Socrates,  who  was  more  zealous  in  this  direction 
than  all  of  them,  was  accused  of  the  very  same  crimes  as  our- 
selves. For  they  said  that  he  was  introducing  new  divinities, 
and  did  not  consider  those  to  be  gods  whom  the  State  recog- 
nized. But  he  cast  out  from  the  State  both  Homer  and  the 
rest  of  the  poets,  and  taught  men  to  reject  the  wicked  demons 
and  those  who  did  the  things  which  the  poets  related;  and 
he  exhorted  them  to  become  acquainted  with  the  God  who 
was  unknown  to  them,  by  means  of  the  investigation  of 
reason,  saying,  *^That  it  is  not  easy  to  find  the  Father  and 
Maker  of  all,  nor,  having  found  Him,  is  it  safe  to  declare  Him 
to  all."  2  But  these  things  our  Christ  did  through  His  own 
power.  For  no  one  trusted  in  Socrates  so  as  to  die  for  this 
doctrine,  but  in  Christ,  who  was  partially  known  even  by  Soc- 
rates (for  He  was  and  is  the  Logos  who  is  in  every  man,  and 
who  foretold  the  things  that  were  to  come  to  pass  both  through 
the  prophets  and  in  His  own  person  when  He  was  made  of  like 
passions  and  taught  these  things),  not  only  philosophers  and 
scholars  beHeved,  but  also  artisans  and  people  entirely  unedu- 
cated, despising  both  glory  and  fear  and  death;  since  He  is 
the  power  of  the  ineffable  Father,  and  not  the  mere  instru- 
ment of  human  reason.^ 

Ch.  13.  ...  I  confess  that  I  both  boast  and  with  all  my 
strength  strive  to  be  found  a  Christian;  not  because  the 
teachings  of  Plato  are  different  from  those  of  Christ,  but 

^7.  e.,  the  Logos;  cf.  previous  chapter.  2  gee  Plato,  TimcBus,  p.  28c. 

3  For  a  remarkable  passage  on  the  moral  influence  of  Christ's  teaching  as 
a  proof  of  the  truth  of  His  message,  see  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  I,  67/. 


74  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

because  they  are  not  in  all  respects  similar,  as  neither  are 
those  of  others,  Stoics,  poets,  and  historians.  For  each  man 
spoke  well  in  proportion  to  the  share  he  had  of  the  sper- 
matic divine  Logos,  seeing  what  was  related  to  it.  But  they 
who  contradict  themselves  on  the  more  important  points 
appear  not  to  have  possessed  the  heavenly  wisdom  and  the 
knowledge  which  cannot  be  spoken  against.  Whatever  things 
were  rightly  said  among  all  men  are  the  property  of  us 
Christians.  For  next  to  God  we  worship  and  love  the  Logos, 
who  is  from  the  unbegotten  and  ineffable  God,  since  also  He 
became  man  for  our  sakes,  that,  becoming  a  partaker  of  our 
sufferings.  He  might  also  bring  us  healing.  For  all  the  writers 
were  able  to  see  realities  darkly  through  the  sowing  of  the 
implanted  Logos  that  was  in  them.  For  the  seed  of  any- 
thing and  a  copy  imparted  according  to  capacity  [i.  e.,  to 
receive]  is  one  thing,  and  quite  another  is  the  thing  itself,  of 
which  there  is  the  participation  and  imitation  according  to 
the  grace  which  is  from  Him. 

(d)  Justin  Martyr,  Apologia,  I,  31,  53.    (MSG,  6 :  375, 406.) 
The  argument  from  prophecy. 

Ch.  31.  There  were  then  among  the  Jews  certain  men  who 
were  prophets  of  God,  through  whom  the  prophetic  Spirit 
[context  shows  that  the  Logos  is  here  meant]  published 
beforehand  things  that  were  to  come  to  pass  before  they 
happened.  And  their  prophecies,  as  they  were  spoken  and 
when  they  were  uttered,  the  kings  who  were  among  the 
Jews  at  the  several  times  carefully  preserved  in  their  posses- 
sion, when  they  had  been  arranged  by  the  prophets  themselves 
in  their  own  Hebrew  language.  .  .  .  They  are  also  in  pos- 
session of  all  Jews  throughout  the  world.  ...  In  these  books 
of  the  prophets  we  found  Jesus  our  Christ  foretold  as  coming, 
born  of  a  virgin,  growing  up  to  manhood,  and  healing  every 
disease  and  every  sickness,  and  raising  the  dead,  and  being 
hated  and  unrecognized,  and  crucified,  and  dying,  and  rising 
again,  and  ascending  into  heaven,  and  both  being  and  also 


LITERARY  DEFENCE  OF   CHRISTIANITY      75 

called  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  certain  persons  should  be  sent 
by  Him  into  every  race  of  men  to  publish  these  things,  and 
that  rather  among  the  Gentiles  [than  among  the  Jews]  men 
should  believe  on  Him.  And  He  was  predicted  before  He 
appeared  first  5,000  years  before,  and  again  3,000,  then  2,000 
then  1,000,  and  yet  again  800;  for  according  to  the  succession 
of  generations  prophets  after  prophets  arose. 

Ch.  53.  Though  we  have  many  other  prophecies,  we  for- 
bear to  speak,  judging  these  sufiicient  for  the  persuasion  of 
those  who  have  ears  capable  of  hearing  and  understanding; 
and  considering  also  that  these  persons  are  able  to  see  that 
we  do  not  make  assertions,  and  are  unable  to  produce  proof, 
like  those  fables  that  are  told  of  the  reputed  sons  of  Jupiter. 
For  with  what  reason  should  we  believe  of  a  crucified  man 
that  He  is  the  first-born  of  the  unbegotten  God,  and  Himself 
will  pass  judgment  on  the  whole  human  race,  unless  we  found 
testimonies  concerning  Him  published  before  He  came  and 
was  born  as  a  man,  and  unless  we  saw  that  things  had  hap- 
pened accordingly? 

CHAPTER  II.    THE  INTERNAL  CRISIS:    THE  GNOSTIC 
AND  OTHER  HERETICAL  SECTS 

In  the  second  century  the  Church  passed  through  an  inter- 
nal crisis  even  more  trying  than  the  great  persecutions  of 
the  following  centuries  and  with  results  far  more  momentous. 
Of  the  conditions  making  possible  such  a  crisis  the  most 
important  was  absence  in  the  Church  of  norms  of  faith  uni- 
versally acknowledged  as  binding.  Then,  again,  many  had 
embraced  Christianity  without  grasping  the  spirit  of  the 
new  religion.  Nearly  all  interpreted  the  Christian  faith  more 
or  less  according  to  their  earlier  philosophical  or  religious 
conceptions;  e.  g.,  the  apologists  within  the  Church  used  the 
philosophical  Logos  doctrine.  In  this  way  arose  numerous  in- 
terpretations of  Christian  teaching  and  perversions  of  that 
teaching,  some  not  at  all  in  harmony  with  the  generally 
received  tradition.     These  discordant  interpretations  or  per- 


76  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

versions  are  the  heretical  movements  of  the  second  century. 
They  varied  in  every  degree  of  departure  from  the  generally 
accepted  Christian  tradition.  Some,  like  the  earlier  Gnostics 
(§  2i),  and  even  the  greater  Gnostic  systems  (§  22),  at  least 
in  their  esoteric  teaching,  show  that  their  principal  inspira- 
tion was  other  than  Christian;  others,  as  the  Gnosticism  of 
Marcion  (§  23)  and  the  enthusiastic  sect  of  the  Montanists 
(§  25),  seem  to  have  built  largely  upon  exaggerated  Christian 
tenets,  contained,  indeed,  in  the  New  Testament,  but  not 
fully  appreciated  by  the  majority  of  Christians;  or  still  others, 
as  the  Encratites  (§  24),  laid  undue  stress  upon  what  was 
generally  recognized  as  an  element  of  Christian  morality. 

The  principal  source  materials  for  the  history  of  Gnosticism  and 
other  heresies  of  this  chapter  may  be  found  collected  and  provided 
with  commentary  in  Hilgenfeld,  Ketzergeschichte  des  Urchristenthums, 
Leipsic,  1884. 

§  21.  The  Earlier  Gnostics:    Gnosticism  in  General. 

§  22.  The  Greater  Gnostic  Systems. 

§  23.  Marcion. 

§  24.  The  Encratites  and  Earlier  Asceticism. 

§  25.  Montanism. 

§  21.    The  Earlier  Gnostics:  Gnosticism  in  General 

Gnosticism  is  a  generic  name  for  a  vast  number  of  syncre- 
tistic  religious  systems  prevalent,  especially  in  the  East,  both 
before  and  after  the  Christian  era.  For  the  most  part  the 
movement  was  outside  of  Christianity,  and  was  already  dying 
out  when  Christianity  appeared.  It  derived  its  essential  fea- 
tures from  Persian  and  Babylonian  sources  and  was  mark- 
edly dualistic.  As  it  spread  toward  the  West,  it  adopted  many 
Western  elements,  making  use  of  Christian  ideas  and  terms 
and  Greek  philosophical  concepts.  Modified  by  such  new 
matter,  it  obtained  a  renewed  lease  of  life.  In  proportion  as 
the  various  schools  of  Gnosticism  became  more  influenced  by 
Christian   elements,   they   were   more   easily   confused   with 


THE  EARLIER   GNOSTICS  77 

Christianity,  and  accordingly  more  dangerous  to  it.  Among 
such  were  the  greater  schools  of  Basilides  and  Valentinus 
(see  next  section).  The  doctrines  of  Gnosticism  were  held  by 
many  who  were  nominally  within  the  Church.  The  tendency 
of  the  Gnostics  and  their  adherents  was  to  form  little  coteries 
and  to  keep  much  of  their  teaching  secret  from  those  who 
were  attracted  by  their  more  popular  tenets.  The  esoteric 
element  seems  to  have  been  the  so-called  '^systems"  in  which 
the  fanciful  and  mythological  element  in  Gnosticism  appears. 
This,  as  being  the  most  vulnerable  part  of  the  Gnostic  teach- 
ing, was  attacked  most  bitterly  by  the  opponents  of  heresy. 
There  are  no  extant  writings  of  the  earher  Gnostics,  Simon, 
Menander,  or  Cerinthus.  They  are  known  only  from  Chris- 
tian opponents. 

Sources  for  the  history  of  Gnosticism:  The  leading  sources 
are  the  Church  Fathers  Irenaeus,  Hippolytus,Tertullian,  Clem- 
ent of  Alexandria  (all  translated  in  ANF),  Origen  (in  part  only 
translated  in  ANF),  and  Epiphanius.  The  accounts  of  these 
bitter  enemies  must  necessarily  be  used  with  caution.  They 
contain,  however,  numerous  fragments  from  Gnostic  writings. 
The  fragments  in  the  ante-Nicene  Fathers  may  be  found  in 
A.  Hilgenfeld,  op.  cit.,  in  Greek,  with  commentary.  For  the 
hterary  remains  of  Gnosticism,  see  Kriiger,  §§  22-31.  The 
more  accessible  are:  Acts  of  Thomas  (best  Greek  text  by 
Bonnet,  Leipsic,  1903,  German  translation  with  excellent 
commentary  in  E.  Hennecke,  N eutestamentliche  Apokryphen, 
Tubingen  and  Leipsic,  1904);  Ptolomaeus,  Epistle  to  Flora 
(in  Epiphanius,  Panarion,  Hser.  XXXIII) ;  Hymn  of  the  Soul, 
from  the  Acts  of  Thomas  (text  and  EngHsh  translation  by 
Bevan  in  Text  and  Studies,  V,  3,  Cambridge,  1897,  also  trans- 
lated in  F.  C.  Burkitt,  Early  Eastern  Christianity,  N.  Y.,  1904). 

(a)  Tertullian,  De  Prcescriptione  Hcereticorum,  7.  (MSL, 
2  :  21.) 

A  wide-spread  opinion  that  Gnosticism  was  fundamentally  a  per- 
version of  Christianity  finds  its  most  striking  expression  in  the  phrase 
of  Harnack  that  it  was  "the  acute  secularizing  or  Hellenizing  of  Chris- 


78  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

tianity  "  {History  of  Dogma,  English  translation,  I,  226).  The  foundation 
for  this  representation  is  the  later  Gnosticism,  which  took  over  many- 
Christian  and  Greek  elements,  and  the  opinion  of  TertulHan  that 
Gnosticism  and  Greek  philosophy  discussed  the  same  questions  and 
held  the  same  opinions.  (C/.  the  thesis  of  Hippolytus  in  his  Philoso- 
phumena,  or  the  Refutation  of  All  Heresies;  see  the  Proemium,  ANF,  V, 
9  /.,  and  especially  bk.  VII.)  Tertullian,  although  retaining  uncon- 
sciously the  impress  of  his  former  Stoicism,  was  violently  opposed  to 
philosophy,  and  in  his  denunciation  of  heresy  felt  that  it  was  a  powerful 
argument  against  the  Gnostics  to  show  similarities  between  their  teach- 
ing and  the  Greek  philosophy  he  so  heartily  detested.  It  is  a  brilliant 
work  and  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  specimen  of  Tertullian 's  style. 

These  are  the  doctrines  of  men  and  of  demons  born  of  the 
spirit  of  this  world's  wisdom,  for  itching  ears;  and  the  Lord, 
calling  this  foolishness,  chose  the  foolish  things  of  this  world 
to  the  confusion  of  philosophy  itself.  For  philosophy  is  the 
material  of  the  world's  wisdom,  the  rash  interpreter  of  the 
nature  and  dispensation  of  God.  Indeed,  heresies  themselves 
are  instigated  by  philosophy.  From  this  source  came  the 
eons,  and  I  know  not  what  infinite  forms,  and  the  trinity  of 
man  in  the  system  of  Valentinus;  he  was  of  Plato's  school. 
From  this  source  came  Marcion's  better  god  with  all  his 
tranquillity;  he  came  of  the  Stoics.  Then  again  the  opinion 
that  the  soul  dies  is  held  by  the  Epicureans.  The  denial  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  body  is  taken  from  the  united  schools  of 
all  philosophers.  When  matter  is  made  equal  to  God,  you 
have  the  teaching  of  Zeno;  and  when  anything  is  alleged 
touching  a  fiery  god,  then  Heraclitus  comes  in.  The  same 
subject-matter  is  discussed  over  and  over  again  by  the  her- 
etics and  the  philosophers;  the  same  arguments  are  involved. 
Whence  and  wherefore  is  evil?  Whence  and  how  has  come 
man?  Besides  these  there  is  the  question  which  Valentinus 
has  very  recently  proposed.  Whence  comes  God? 

(6)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  23.     (MSG,  7 :  670.) 

Simon  Magus.  For  additional  source  material,  see  Justin  Martyr, 
Apol.  I,  26,  56,  Dial.  c.  Try  ph.,  120;  Hippolytus,  Ref.  VI,  72/.  The 
appearance  of  Simon  in  the  pseudo-Clementine  literature  (translated 
in   ANF,    VIII),    presents   an   interesting   historical   problem.      The 


THE  EARLIER   GNOSTICS  79 

present  condition  of  investigation  is  given  in  the  article  "Clementine 
Literature"  by  J.  V.  Bartlett,  in  Encyc.  Brit.,  eleventh  ed. 

Simon  the  Samaritan,  that  magician  of  whom  Luke,  the 
disciple  and  follower  of  the  Apostles,  says:  "But  there  was  a 
certain  man,  Simon  by  name,"  etc.  [Acts  8  :  9-1 1,  20,  21,  23.] 
Since  he  did  not  put  his  faith  in  God  a  whit  more,  he 
set  himself  eagerly  to  contend  against  the  Apostles,  in  order 
that  he  himself  might  seem  to  be  a  wonderful  being,  and 
studied  with  still  greater  zeal  the  whole  range  of  magic  art, 
that  he  might  the  better  bewilder  the  multitude  of  men. 
Such  was  his  procedure  in  the  reign  of  Claudius  Caesar,  by 
whom  also  he  is  said  to  have  been  honored  with  a  statue  on 
account  of  his  magic.  This  man,  then,  was  glorified  by  many 
as  a  god,  and  he  taught  that  it  was  he  himself  who  appeared 
among  the  Jews  as  the  Son,  but  descended  in  Samaria  as  the 
Father,  while  he  came  to  other  nations  in  the  character  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  He  represented  himself  as  the  loftiest  of  all 
powers,  that  it  is  he  who  is  over  all  as  the  Father,  and  he 
allowed  himself  to  be  called  whatsoever  men  might  name  him. 

Now  this  Simon  of  Samaria,  from  whom  all  heresies  derive 
their  origin,  has  as  the  material  for  his  sect  the  following: 
Having  redeemed  from  slavery  at  Tyre,  a  city  of  Phoenicia,  a 
certain  woman  named  Helena,^  a  prostitute,  he  was  in  the 
habit  of  carrying  her  about  with  him,  declaring  that  she  was 
the  first  conception  [Enncea]  of  his  mind,  the  mother  of  all,  by 
whom  he  conceived  in  his  mind  to  make  the  angels  and  arch- 
angels. For  this  Enncea,  leaping  forth  from  him  and  compre- 
hending the  will  of  her  father,  descended  to  the  lower  regions 
and  generated  angels  and  powers,  by  whom,  also,  he  declared 
this  world  was  made.  But  after  she  had  generated  them  she 
was  detained  by  them  through  jealousy,  because  they  were 
unwilhng  that  they  should  be  regarded  as  the  progeny  of 
any  other  being.  As  to  himself,  he  was  wholly  unknown  to 
them,  but  his  Enncea  was  detained  by  those  powers  and 

^  For  a  discussion  of  this  Helena,  see  Bousset,  Die  Hauptprobleme  der  Gnosis , 
1907,  pp.  77/. 


So         THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

angels  who  had  been  produced  by  her.  She  suffered  all  kinds 
of  contumely  from  them,  so  that  she  could  not  return  upward 
to  her  father,  but  was  even  shut  up  in  a  human  body  and  for 
ages  passed  in  succession  from  one  female  body  to  another, 
as  from  one  vessel  to  another  vessel.  She  was  in  that  Helen 
on  whose  account  the  Trojan  War  was  undertaken;  where- 
fore also  Stesichorus  was  struck  blind,  because  he  cursed  her 
in  his  poems;  but  afterward,  when  he  had  repented  and 
written  those  verses  which  are  called  pahnodes,  in  which  he 
sung  her  praises,  he  saw  once  more.  Thus  passing  from 
body  to  body  and  suffering  insults  in  every  one  of  them,  she 
at  last  became  a  common  prostitute;  and  she  it  is  who  was 
the  lost  sheep. 

For  this  purpose  he  himself  had  come,  that  he  might  win 
her  first  and  free  her  from  chains,  and  confer  salvation  upon 
men  by  making  himself  known  to  them.  For  since  the  angels 
ruled  the  world  poorly,  because  each  one  of  them  coveted  the 
principal  power,  he  had  come  to  mend  matters  and  had  de- 
scended, been  transfigured  and  assimilated  to  powers  and 
angels,  so  that  he  might  appear  among  men  as  man,  although 
he  was  not  a  man;  and  that  he  was  supposed  to  have  suffered 
in  Judea,  although  he  had  not  suffered.  Moreover,  the  proph- 
ets inspired  by  the  angels,  who  were  the  makers  of  the  world, 
pronounced  their  prophecies;  for  which  reason  those  who  place 
their  trust  in  him  and  Helena  no  longer  regard  them,  but  are 
free  to  do  what  they  will;  for  men  are  saved  according  to 
his  grace,  and  not  according  to  their  righteous  works.  For 
deeds  are  not  righteous  in  the  nature  of  things,  but  by  mere 
accident  and  just  as  those  angels  who  made  the  world  have 
determined,  seeking  by  such  precepts  to  bring  men  into  bond- 
age. On  this  account  he  promised  that  the  world  should 
be  dissolved  and  that  those  who  are  his  should  be  freed  from 
the  rule  of  them  who  made  the  world. 

Thus,  then,  the  mystic  priests  belonging  to  this  sect  both 
live  profligately  and  practise  magical  arts,  each  one  to  the 
extent  of  his  ability.     They  use  exorcisms  and  incantations. 


THE   EARLIER   GNOSTICS  8i 

love-potions,  also,  and  charms,  as  well  as  those  beings  who  are 
called  ''familiars"  [paredri]  and  "dream  senders"  [oniro- 
pompi],  and  whatever  other  curious  arts  can  be  had  are  eagerly 
pressed  into  their  service. 

(c)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  HcBr.,  I,  23.     (MSG,  7  :  673.)  "^ 
The  system  of  Menander.     Cf.  also  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  26. 

The  successor  of  Simon  Magus  was  Menander,  a  Samaritan 
by  birth,  who  also  became  a  perfect  adept  in  magic.  He 
affirms  that  the  first  power  is  unknown  to  all,  but  that  he 
himself  is  the  person  who  has  been  sent  forth  by  the  invisible 
beings  as  a  saviour  for  the  salvation  of  men.  The  world  was 
made  by  angels,  who,  as  he  also,  like  Simon,  says,  were  pro- 
duced by  the  Ennoea.  He  gives  also,  as  he  affirms,  by  means 
of  the  magic  which  he  teaches  knowledge,  so  that  one  may 
overcome  those  angels  that  made  the  world.  For  his  disciples 
obtain  the  resurrection  by  the  fact  that  they  are  baptized 
into  him,  and  they  can  die  no  more,  but  remain  immortal 
without  ever  growing  old. 

(d)  Iren^us,  Adv.  HcBr.,  I,  26.     (MSG,  7  :  686.) 

The  system  of  Cerinthus.  For  additional  source  material,  see 
Irenaeus,  III,  3,  4;  Hippolytus,  Ref.  VII,  33;  X,  21;  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec,  III,  28. 

Cerinthus,  again,  taught  in  Asia  that  the  world  was  not 
made  by  the  supreme  God,  but  by  a  power  separated  and  dis- 
tant from  that  Ruler  [principalitate]  who  is  over  the  universe, 
and  ignorant  of  the  God  who  is  above  all.  He  represented 
Jesus  as  not  having  been  born  of  a  virgin,  for  this  seemed 
impossible  to  him,  but  as  having  been  the  son  of  Joseph  and 
Mary  in  the  same  way  that  all  other  men  are  sons,  only  he 
was  more  righteous,  prudent,  and  wise  than  other  men.  After 
his  baptism  Christ  descended  upon  him  in  the  form  of  a  dove 
from  the  Supreme  Ruler;  and  that  then  he  proclaimed  the 
unknown  Father  and  performed  miracles.    But  at  last  Christ 


82  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

departed  from  Jesus,  and  then  Jesus  suffered  and  rose  again, 
but  Christ  remained  impassable,  since  He  was  a  spiritual  being. 

§22.    The   Greater   Gnostic   Systems:    Basilides  and 

Valentinus 

The  Gnostic  systems  having  most  influence  within  the 
Church  and  effect  upon  its  development  were  those  of  Basil- 
ides and  Valentinus.  Of  these  teachers  and  their  followers 
we  have  not  only  the  accounts  of  those  opponents  who 
attacked  principally  their  esoteric  and  most  characteristically 
Gnostic  tenets,  but  also  fragments  and  other  remains  which 
give  a  more  favorable  impression  of  the  religious  and  moral 
value  of  the  great  schools  of  Gnosticism.  In  their  "systems" 
of  vast  theogonies  and  cosmologies,  in  their  wild  mytho- 
logical treatment  of  the  most  abstract  conceptions  and  their 
dualism,  the  Church  writers  naturally  saw  at  once  their  most 
vulnerable  and  most  dangerous  element. 

(A)   The  School  oj  Basilides 

The  school  of  Basilides  marks  the  beginning  of  the  dis- 
tinctively Hellenistic  stadium  of  Gnosticism.  Basilides,  its 
founder,  apparently  worked  first  in  the  East;  circa  120-130 
he  was  at  Alexandria.  He  was  the  first  important  Gnostic 
writer.  Of  his  Gospel,  Commentary  on  that  Gospel  in  twenty- 
four  books  {Exegetica)j^Xid  his  odes  only  fragments  remain  of 
the  second,  preserved  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  in  iYiQActa 
Archelai  (collected  by  Hilgenfeld,  Ketzergeschichte,  207-213). 

Additional  source  material:  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom. y  II, 
3,  8,  20;  IV,  24,  26  (ANF,  II);  Hippolytus,  Ref.,  VII,  20-27;  X,  14 
(=  VII,  1-15,  X,  10,  ANF,  V) ;  Eusebius,  HisL  Ec,  IV,  7.  The  account 
of  Hippolytus  differs  markedly  from  that  of  Irenaeus,  and  his  quotations 
and  references  have  been  the  subject  of  long  dispute  among  scholars. 

(a)  Acta  Archelai,  55.     (MSG,  10:1526.) 

The  Acta  Archelai  purport  to  be  an  account  of  a  disputation  held 
in  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Probus  (276-282)  by  Archelaus,  Bishop 
of  Kaskar  in  Mesopotamia,  with  Mani,  the  founder  of  Manichaeanism. 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  Ss 

The  work  is  of  uncertain  authorship;  it  belongs  to  the  first  part  of 
the  fourth  century.  It  is  the  most  important  source  for  the  Mani- 
chaean  doctrine  {v.  infra,  §  54).  It  exists  only  in  a  Latin  translation 
probably  from  a  Greek  original. 

Among  the  Persians  there  was  also  a  certain  preacher,  one 
Basilides,  of  more  ancient  date,  not  long  after  the  time  of  our 
Apostles.  Since  he  was  of  a  shrewd  disposition  himself,  and 
observed  that  at  that  time  all  other  subjects  were  preoccupied, 
he  determined  to  affirm  that  dualism  which  was  maintained 
also  by  Scythianus.  And  so,  since  he  had  nothing  to  advance 
which  he  might  call  his  own,  he  brought  the  sayings  of  others 
before  his  adversaries.  And  all  his  books  contain  some 
matters  difficult  and  extremely  harsh.  The  thirteenth  book 
of  his  Tractates,^  however,  is  still  extant,  which  begins  thus: 
*'In  writing  the  thirteenth  book  of  our  Tractates,  the  word 
of  salvation  furnished  us  with  the  necessary  and  fruitful  word. 
It  illustrates^  under  the  figure  of  a  rich  [principle]  and  a  poor 
[principle],  a  nature  without  root  and  without  place  and  only 
supervenes  upon  things.^  This  is  the  only  topic  which  the 
book  contains."  Does  it  not,  then,  contain  a  strange  word,  as 
also  certain  persons  think?  Will  ye  not  all  be  offended  with 
the  book  itself,  of  which  this  is  the  beginning?  But  Basilides, 
returning  to  the  subject,  some  five  hundred  fines  intervening, 
more  or  less,  says:  ''Give  up  this  vain  and  curious  variation, 
and  let  us  rather  find  out  what  inquiries  the  Barbarians  [i.  e., 
the  Persians]  have  instituted  concerning  good  and  evil,  and 
to  what  opinions  they  have  come  on  all  these  subjects.  For 
certain  among  them  have  said  that  there  are  for  all  things 
two  beginnings  [or  principles],  to  w^hich  they  have  referred 
good  and  evil,  holding  these  principles  are  without  beginning 
and  ingenerate;  that  is  to  say,  that  in  the  origins  of  things 
there  were  fight  and  darkness,  which  existed  of  themselves, 
and  which  were  not  declared  to  exist. ^     When  these  subsisted 

^  Probably  to  be  identified  with  his  Exegetica. 

2  Query:  the  antagonism  between  good  and  evil. 

3  Very  obscure;  see  ANF,  and  Routh,  ad  loc,  and  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.,  1,  402. 
*Routh,  loc.  ciL,  proposes  as  an  emendation,  "  declared  to  be  made." 


84  THE   CRITICAL   PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

by  themselves,  they  each  led  its  own  proper  mode  of  life 
as  it  willed  to  lead,  and  such  as  was  competent  to  it.  For 
in  the  case  of  all  things,  what  is  proper  to  it  is  in  amity  with 
it,  and  nothing  seems  evil  to  itself.  But  after  they  came  to 
the  knowledge  of  each  other,  and  after  the  darkness  contem- 
plated the  light,  then,  as  if  fired  with  a  passion  for  something 
superior,  the  darkness  rushed  to  have  intercourse  with  the 
light." 

(b)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  IV,  12.  (MSG,  8  : 
1289.) 

Basilides  taught  the  transmigration  of  souls  as  an  explanation  of 
human  suffering.  Cf.  Origen  in  Ep.  ad  Rom.,  V:  "I  [Paul],  he  says,  died 
[Rom.  7  :  9],  for  now  sin  began  to  be  reckoned  unto  me.  But  Basilides, 
not  noticing  that  these  things  ought  to  be  understood  of  the  natural 
law,  according  to  impious  and  foolish  fables  turns  this  apostolic  saying 
into  the  Pythagorean  dogma,  that  is,  attempts  to  prove  from  this 
word  of  the  Apostle  that  souls  are  transferred  from  one  body  to 
another.  For  he  says  that  the  Apostle  has  said,  *I  lived  without  any 
law' — i.  e.,  before  I  came  into  the  body  I  lived  in  that  sort  of  body 
which  is  not  under  the  law,  i.  e.,  of  beasts  and  birds." 

Basilides,  in  the  twenty-third  book  of  the  Exegetics,  re- 
specting those  that  are  punished  by  martyrdom,  expresses 
himself  in  the  following  language:  ''For  I  say  this.  Whoso- 
ever fall  under  the  afflictions  mentioned,  in  consequence  of 
unconsciously  transgressing  in  other  matters,  are  brought  to 
this  good  end  by  the  kindness  of  Him  who  brings  about  all 
things,  though  they  are  accused  on  other  grounds;  so  that 
they  may  not  suffer  as  condemned  for  what  are  acknowledged 
to  be  iniquities,  nor  reproached  as  the  adulterer  or  the  mur- 
derer, but  because  they  are  Christians;  which  will  console 
them,  so  that  they  do  not  appear  to  suffer.  And  if  one  who 
has  not  sinned  at  all  incur  suffering  (a  rare  case),  yet  even 
he  will  not  suffer  aught  through  the  machinations  of  power, 
but  will  suffer  as  the  child  which  seems  not  to  have  sinned 
would  suffer."  Then  further  on  he  adds:  "As,  then,  the 
child  which  has  not  sinned  before,  nor  actually  committed 
sin,  but  has  in  itself  that  which  committed  sin,  when  sub- 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  85 

jected  to  suffering  is  benefited,  reaping  the  advantage  of 
many  difficulties;  so,  also,  although  a  perfect  man  may  not 
have  sinned  in  act,  and  yet  endures  afflictions,  he  suffers 
similarly  with  the  child.  Having  within  him  the  sinful  prin- 
ciple, but  not  embracing  the  opportunity  of  committing 
sin,  he  does  not  sin;  so  that  it  is  to  be  reckoned  to  him  as 
not  having  sinned.  For  as  he  who  wishes  to  commit  adultery 
is  an  adulterer,  although  he  fails  to  commit  adultery,  and  he 
who  wishes  to  commit  murder  is  a  murderer,  although  he  is 
unable  to  kill;  so,  also,  if  I  see  the  man  without  sin,  whom  I 
refer  to,  suffering,  though  he  have  done  nothing  bad,  I  should 
call  him  bad  on  account  of  the  wish  to  sin.  For  I  will  affirm 
anything  rather  than  call  Providence  evil."  Then,  in  contin- 
uation, he  says  expressly  concerning  the  Lord,  as  concerning 
man:  ^'If,  then,  passing  from  all  these  observations,  you  were 
to  proceed  to  put  me  to  shame  by  saying,  perchance  imper- 
sonating certain  parties.  This  man  has  then  sinned,  for  this 
man  has  suffered;  if  you  permit,  I  will  say.  He  has  not 
sinned,  but  was  like  a  child  suffering.  If  you  insist  more 
urgently,  I  would  say,  That  the  man  you  name  is  man,  but 
God  is  righteous,  'for  no  one  is  pure,'  as  one  said,  'from 
pollution.'"  But  the  hypothesis  of  Basilides  says  that  the 
soul,  having  sinned  before  in  another  life,  endures  punish- 
ment in  this — the  elect  soul  with  honor  by  martyrdom,  the 
other  purged  by  appropriate  punishment. 

(c)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  HcBr.,  I,  24  :7,ff.     (MSG,  7:675.) 

The  system  of  Basilides,  as  presented  by  Irenaeus,  is  dualistic  and 
emanationist;  with  it  is  to  be  compared  the  presentation  of  the  sys- 
tem by  Hippolytus  in  his  Philosophumena,  where  it  appears  as 
evolutionary  and  pantheistic.  The  trend  of  present  opinion  appears 
to  be  that  the  account  given  by  Irenaeus  is  more  correct,  or,  at  least,  is 
earlier.  The  following  account  has  all  the  appearance  of  having  been 
taken  from  an  original  source  (cf.  Hilgenfeld,  Ketzergeschichte,  195, 
1 98) .  It  represents  the  esoteric  and  more  distinctively  Gnostic  teaching 
of  the  school. 

Ch.  3.  Basilides,  to  appear  to  have  discovered  something 
more  sublime  and  plausible,  gives  an  immense  development 


S6  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

to  his  doctrine.  He  declares  that  in  the  beginning  the  Nous 
was  born  of  the  unborn  Father,  that  from  him  in  turn  was 
born  the  Logos,  then  from  the  Logos  the  Phronesis,  from  the 
Phronesis  Sophia  and  Dynamis,  and  from  Dynamis  and 
Sophia  the  powers  and  principalities  and  angels,  whom  he 
calls  the  first;  and  that  by  these  the  first  heaven  was  made. 
Then  by  emanation  from  these  others  were  formed,  and  these 
created  another  heaven  similar  to  the  first.  And  in  like 
manner,  when  still  others  had  been  formed  by  emanations 
from  these,  corresponding  to  those  who  were  over  them,  they 
framed  another  third  heaven;  and  from  this  third  heaven 
downward  there  was  a  fourth  succession  of  descendants;  and 
so  on,  in  the  same  manner,  they  say  that  other  and  still  other 
princes  and  angels  were  formed,  and  three  hundred  and  sixty- 
five  heavens.  Wherefore  the  year  contained  the  same  num- 
ber of  days  in  conformity  with  the  number  of  the  heavens. 

Ch.  4.  The  angels  occupying  the  lowest  heaven,  that, 
namely,  which  is  visible  to  us,  created  all  those  things  which 
are  in  the  world,  and  made  allotments  among  themselves  of 
the  earth,  and  of  those  nations  which  are  upon  it.  The  chief 
of  them  is  he  who  is  thought  to  be  the  God  of  the  Jews. 
Inasmuch  as  he  wished  to  make  the  other  nations  subject  to 
his  own  people,  the  Jews,  all  the  other  princes  resisted  and 
opposed  him.  Wherefore  all  other  nations  were  hostile  to 
his  nation.  But  the  unbegotten  and  nameless  Father,  seeing 
their  ruin,  sent  his  own  first-begotten  Nous,  for  he  it  is 
who  is  called  Christ,  to  set  free  from  the  power  of  those  who 
made  the  world  them  that  believe  in  him.  He  therefore 
appeared  on  earth  as  a  man  to  the  nations  of  those  powers 
and  wrought  miracles.  Wherefore  he  did  not  himself  suffer 
death,  but  Simon,  a  certain  Cyrenian,  was  compelled  and 
bore  the  cross  in  his  stead;  and  this  latter  was  transfigured 
by  him  that  he  might  be  thought  to  be  Jesus  and  was  crucified 
through  ignorance  and  error;  but  Jesus  himself  took  the  form 
of  Simon  and  stood  by  and  derided  him.  For  as  he  is  an 
incorporeal  power  and  the  Nous  of  the  unborn  Father,  he 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  87 

transfigured  himself  at  pleasure,  and  so  ascended  to  him  who 
had  sent  him,  deriding  them,  inasmuch  as  he  could  not  be 
held,  and  was  invisible  to  all.  Those,  then,  who  know  these 
things  have  been  freed  from  the  princes  who  made  the  world; 
so  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  confess  him  who  was  crucified, 
but  him  who  came  in  the  form  of  a  man,  and  was  thought 
to  have  been  crucified,  and  was  called  Jesus,  and  was  sent 
by  the  Father,  that  by  this  dispensation  he  might  destroy 
the  works  of  the  makers  of  the  world.  Therefore,  Basilides 
says  that  if  any  one  confesses  the  crucified,  he  is  still  a  slave, 
under  the  power  of  those  who  made  our  bodies;  but  whoever 
denies  him  has  been  freed  from  these  beings  and  is  acquainted 
with  the  dispensation  of  the  unknown  Father. 

Ch.  5.  Salvation  is  only  of  the  soul,  for  the  body  is  by 
nature  corruptible.  He  says,  also,  that  even  the  prophecies 
were  derived  from  those  princes  who  made  the  world,  but 
the  law  was  especially  given  by  their  chief,  who  led  the  people 
out  of  the  land  of  Eg}'pt.  He  attaches  no  importance  to 
meats  offered  to  idols,  thinks  them  of  no  consequence,  but 
makes  use  of  them  without  hesitation.  He  holds,  also,  the 
use  of  other  things  as  indifferent,  and  also  every  kind  of  lust. 
These  men,  furthermore,  use  magic,  images,  incantations, 
invocations,  and  every  other  kind  of  curious  arts.  Coining 
also  certain  names  as  if  they  were  those  of  the  angels,  they 
assert  that  some  of  these  belong  to  the  first,  others  to  the 
second,  heaven ;  and  then  they  strive  to  set  forth  the  names, 
principles,  angels,  powers,  of  the  three  hundred  and  sixty-five 
imagined  heavens.  They  also  affirm  that  the  name  in  which 
the  Saviour  ascended  and  descended  is  Caulacau.^ 

Ch.  6.  He,  then,  who  has  learned  these  things,  and  known 
all  the  angels  and  their  causes,  is  rendered  invisible  and 
incomprehensible  to  the  angels  and  powers,  even  as  Caulacau 
also  was.  And  as  the  Son  was  unknown  to  all,  so  must  they 
also  be  known  by  no  one;   but  while  they  know  all  and  pass 

^  A  mystic  name;  it  is  the  Hebrew  for  "line  upon  line,"  see  Is.  28  :  10.  It 
means  norm  or  rule. 


88  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

through  all,  they  themselves  remain  invisible  and  unknown 
to  all;  for  *'Do  thou,"  they  say,  ''know  all,  but  let  nobody 
know  thee."  For  this  reason,  persons  of  such  a  persuasion 
are  also  ready  to  recant,  yea,  rather,  it  is  impossible  that  they 
should  suffer  on  account  of  a  mere  name,  since  they  are  alike 
to  all.  The  multitude,  however,  cannot  understand  these 
matters,  but  only  one  out  of  a  thousand,  or  two  out  of  ten 
thousand.  They  declare  that  they  are  no  longer  Jews,  and 
that  they  are  not  yet  Christians;  and  that  it  is  not  at  all 
fitting  to  speak  openly  of  their  mysteries,  but  right  to  keep 
them  secret  by  preserving  silence. 

Ch.  7.  They  make  out  the  local  position  of  the  three  hun- 
dred and  sixty-five  heavens  in  the  same  way  as  do  the  math- 
ematicians. For,  accepting  the  theorems  of  the  latter,  they 
have  transferred  them  to  their  own  style  of  doctrine.  They 
hold  that  their  chief  is  Abraxas  [or  Abrasax];  and  on  this 
account  that  the  word  contains  in  itself  the  numbers  amount- 
ing to  three  hundred  and  sixty-five. 

(B)     The  School  of  Valentinus 

The  Valentinians  were  the  most  important  of  all  the  Gnos- 
tics closely  connected  with  the  Church.  The  school  had  many 
adherents  scattered  throughout  the  Roman  Empire,  its  lead- 
ing teachers  were  men  of  culture  and  Hterary  ability,  and  the 
sect  maintained  itself  a  long  time.  Valentinus  himself  was 
a  native  of  Egypt,  and  probably  educated  at  Alexandria, 
where  he  may  have  come  under  the  influence  of  Basilides. 
He  taught  his  own  system  chiefly  at  Rome  c.  140-c.  160. 
The  great  work  of  Irenaeus  against  the  Gnostics,  although 
having  all  Gnostics  in  view,  especially  deals  with  the  Valen- 
tinians in  their  various  forms,  because  Irenaeus  was  of  the 
opinion  that  he  who  refutes  their  system  refutes  all  {cf.  Adv. 
HcBr.,  IV,  pmf.,  2).  It  is  difficult  to  reconstruct  with  cer- 
tainty the  esoteric  system  of  Valentinus  as  distinguished  from 
possibly  later  developments  of  the  school,  as  Irenaeus,  the 
principal  authority,  follows  not  only  Valentinus,  but  Ptolo- 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS  89 

maeus  and  others,  in  describing  the  system.  The  following 
selection  of  sources  gives  fragments  of  the  letters  and  other 
writings  of  Valentinus  himself  as  preserved  by  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  passages  from  Irenaeus  bringing  out  distinctive 
features  of  the  system,  and  the  important  letter  of  Ptolomaeus 
to  Flora,  one  of  the  very  few  extant  writings  of  the  Gnostics 
of  an  early  date.  It  gives  a  good  idea  of  the  character  of 
the  exoteric  teaching  of  the  school. 

Additional  source  material:  The  principal  authority  for  the  system 
of  the  Valentinians  is  Irenasus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  Lib.  I  (ANF),  see  also 
Hippolytus,  Refut.,  VI,  24-32  (ANF) ;  "The  Hymn  of  the  Soul,"  from 
the  Acts  of  Thomas,  trans,  by  A.  A.  Bevan,  Texts  and  Studies,  III, 
Cambridge,  1897;  The  Fragments  of  Heracleon,  trans,  by  A.  E.  Burke, 
Text  and  Studies,  I,  Cambridge,  1891;  see  also  ANF,  IX,  index,  p.  526, 
s.  v.,  Heracleon.  The  Excerpta  Theodoti  contained  in  ANF,  VIII,  are 
really  the  Excerpta  Prophetica,  another  collection,  identified  with  the 
Excerpta  Theodoti  by  mistake  of  the  editor  of  the  American  edition, 
A.  C.  Coxe  (on  the  Excerpta,  see  Zahn,  History  of  the  Canon  of  the  New 
Testament). 

(a)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  IV,  13.    (MSG,  8  :  1296.) 

The  following  passages  appear  to  be  taken  from  the  same  homily  of 
Valentinus.  The  pneumatics  are  naturally  immortal,  but  have  assumed 
mortahty  to  overcome  it.  Death  is  the  work  of  the  imperfect  Demi- 
urge. The  concluding  portion,  which  is  very  obscure,  does  not  fit 
well  into  the  Valentinian  system.    Cf.  Hilgenfeld,  op.  cit.,  p.  300. 

Valentinian  in  a  homily  writes  in  these  words:  "Ye  are 
originally  immortal,  and  ye  are  children  of  eternal  life,  and  ye 
desired  to  have  death  distributed  to  you,  that  ye  may  spend 
and  lavish  it,  and  that  death  may  die  in  you  and  by  you;  for 
when  ye  dissolve  the  world,  and  are  not  yourselves  dissolved, 
ye  have  dominion  over  creation  and  all  corruption."  ^  For 
he  also,  similarly  with  Basihdes,  supposes  a  class  saved  by 
nature  [i.  e.,  the  pneumatics,  v.  infra],  and  that  this  different 
race  has  come  hither  to  us  from  above  for  the  abolition  of 
death,  and  that  the  origin  of  death  is  the  work  of  the  Creator 

^  Cf.  the  doctrine  of  redemption  among  the  Marcosians,  a  branch  of  the  Val- 
entinians, stated  in  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  215. 


90  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

of  the  world.  Wherefore,  also,  he  thus  expounds  that  Scrip- 
ture, "No  one  shall  see  the  face  of  God  and  live"  [Ex.  7,7^ :  20], 
as  if  He  were  the  cause  of  death.  Respecting  this  God,  he 
makes  those  allusions,  when  writing,  in  these  expressions:  "As 
much  as  the  image  is  inferior  to  the  living  face,  so  much  is  the 
world  inferior  to  the  living  Eon.  What  is,  then,  the  cause  of 
the  image?  It  is  the  majesty  of  the  face,  which  exhibits  the 
figure  to  the  painter,  to  be  honored  by  his  name;  for  the 
form  is  not  found  exactly  to  the  life,  but  the  name  supplies 
what  is  wanting  in  that  which  is  formed.  The  invisibility 
of  God  co-operates  also  for  the  sake  of  the  faith  of  that  which 
has  been  fashioned."  For  the  Demiurge,  called  God  and  Fa- 
ther, he  designated  the  image  and  prophet  of  the  true  God, 
as  the  Painter,  and  Wisdom,  whose  image,  which  is  formed, 
is  to  the  glory  of  the  invisible  One;  since  the  things  which 
proceed  from  a  pair  [syzygy]  are  complements  [pleromata], 
and  those  which  proceed  from  one  are  images.  But  since  what 
is  seen  is  no  part  of  Him,  the  soul  [psyche]  comes  from  what 
is  intermediate,  and  is  different;  and  this  is  the  inspiration 
of  the  different  spirit.  And  generally  what  is  breathed  into 
the  soul,  which  is  the  image  of  the  spirit  [pneuma],  and  in 
general,  what  is  said  of  the  Demiurge,  who  was  made  accord- 
ing to  the  image,  they  say  was  foretold  by  a  sensible  image 
in  the  book  of  Genesis  respecting  the  origin  of  man;  and  the 
likeness  they  transfer  to  themselves,  teaching  that  the  addi- 
tion of  the  different  spirit  was  made,  unknown  to  the  Demi- 
urge. 

(b)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  II,  20.    (MSG,  8  :  1057.) 

According  to  Basilides,  the  various  passions  of  the  soul  were  no  orig- 
inal parts  of  the  soul,  but  appendages  to  the  soul.  ''They  were  in  es- 
sence certain  spirits  attached  to  the  rational  soul,  through  some  original 
perturbation  and  confusion;  and  that  again,  other  bastard  and  heter- 
ogeneous natures  of  spirits  grow  onto  them,  like  that  of  the  wolf,  the 
ape,  the  lion,  and  the  goat,  whose  properties,  showing  themselves  around 
the  soul,  they  say,  assimilate  the  lusts  of  the  soul  to  the  likeness 
of  these  animals."  See  the  whole  passage  immediately  preceding 
the  following  fragment.     The  fragment  can  best  be  understood  by  ref- 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  91 

erence  to  the  presentation  of  the  system  by  W.  Bousset  in  Encyc.  Brit.j 
eleventh  ed.,  art.  "Basilides." 

Valentinus,  too,  in  a  letter  to  certain  people,  writes  in  these 
very  words  respecting  the  appendages:  "There  is  One  good, 
by  whose  presence  is  the  manifestation,  which  is  by  the  Son, 
and  by  Him  alone  can  the  heart  become  pure,  by  the  expulsion 
of  every  evil  spirit  from  the  heart;  for  the  multitude  of 
spirits  dwelhng  in  it  do  not  suffer  it  to  be  pure;  but  each  of 
them  performs  his  own  deeds,  insulting  it  oft  with  unseemly 
lusts.  And  the  heart  seems  to  be  treated  somewhat  like  a 
caravansary.  For  the  latter  has  holes  and  ruts  made  in  it, 
and  is  often  filled  with  filthy  dung;  men  hving  filthily  in  it, 
and  taking  no  care  for  the  place  as  belonging  to  others.  So 
fares  it  with  the  heart  as  long  as  there  is  no  thought  taken 
for  it,  being  unclean  and  the  abode  of  demons  many.  But 
when  the  only  good  Father  visits  it,  it  is  sanctified  and  gleams 
with  light.  And  he  who  possesses  such  a  heart  is  so  blessed 
that  he  shall  see  God." 

(c)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  II,  8.     (MSG,  8  :  972.) 

The  teaching  in  the  following  passage  attaches  itself  to  the  text, 
''The  fear  of  God  is  the  beginning  of  wisdom"  (c/.  Prov.  1:7).  Com- 
pare with  it  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcev.,  I,  30:  6. 

Here  the  followers  of  Basihdes,  interpreting  this  expression 
[Prov.  I  :  7]  say  that  "the  Archon,  having  heard  the  speech 
of  the  Spirit,  who  was  being  ministered  to,  was  struck  with 
amazement  both  with  the  voice  and  the  vision,  having  had 
glad  tidings  beyond  his  hopes  announced  to  him;  and  that 
his  amazement  was  called  fear,  which  became  the  origin  of 
wisdom,  which  distinguishes  classes,  and  discriminates,  and 
perfects,  and  restores.  For  not  the  world  alone,  but  also 
the  election,  He  that  is  over  all  has  set  apart  and  sent  forth." 

And  Valentinus  appears  also  in  an  epistle  to  have  adopted 
such  views.  For  he  writes  in  these  very  words:  "And  as 
terror  fell  on  the  angels  at  this  creature,  because  he  uttered 
things  greater  than  proceeds  from  his  formation,  by  reason 


92  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

of  the  being  in  him  who  had  invisibly  communicated  a  germ 
of  the  supernal  essence,  and  who  spoke  with  free  utterance; 
so,  also,  among  the  tribes  of  men  in  the  world  the  works  of 
men  became  terrors  to  those  who  made  them — as,  for  exam- 
ple, images  and  statues.  And  the  hands  of  all  fashion  things 
to  bear  the  image  of  God;  for  Adam,  formed  into  the  name  of 
man,  inspired  the  dread  attaching  to  the  pre-existing  man,  as 
having  his  being  in  him;  and  they  were  terror-stricken  and 
speedily  marred  the  work.'^ 

{d)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  Ill,  7.    (MSG,  8  :  1151.) 

The  Docetism  of  Valentinus  comes  out  in  the  following.  It  is  to 
be  noted  that  Clement  not  only  does  not  controvert  the  position  taken 
by  the  Gnostic  as  to  the  reality  of  the  bodily  functions  of  Jesus,  but 
in  his  own  person  makes  almost  the  same  assertions  {cf.  Strom.,  VI,  9). 
He  might  indeed  call  himself,  as  he  does  in  this  latter  passage,  a 
Gnostic  in  the  sense  of  the  true  or  Christian  Gnostic,  but  he  comes 
very  close  to  the  position  of  the  non-Christian  Gnostic. 

Valentinus  in  an  epistle  to  Agathopous  says:  ''Since  He 
endured  all  things,  and  was  continent  [i.  e.,  self -con  trolled], 
Jesus,  accordingly,  obtained  for  Himself  divinity.  He  ate  and 
drank  in  a  peculiar  manner,  not  giving  forth  His  food.  Such 
was  the  power  of  His  continence  [self-control]  that  the  food 
was  not  corrupted  in  Him,  because  He  himself  was  without 
corruption.'' 

(e)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  7,  15;  I,  8,  23.  (MSG,  7  :  517, 
528.) 

The  division  of  mankind  into  three  classes,  according  to  their  nature 
and  consequent  capacity  for  salvation,  is  characteristic  of  the  Valen- 
tinian  Gnosticism.  The  other  Gnostics  divided  mankind  into  two 
classes:  those  capable  of  salvation,  or  the  pneumatics,  or  Gnostics, 
and  those  who  perish  in  the  final  destruction  of  material  existence,  or 
the  hyhcs.  Valentinus  avails  himself  of  the  notion  of  the  trichotomy  of 
human  nature,  and  gives  a  place  for  the  bulk  of  Christians,  those 
who  did  not  embrace  Gnosticism;  cf.  Irenaeus,  ibid.,  I,  6.  Valentinus 
remained  long  within  the  Church,  accommodating  his  teaching  as 
far  as  possible,  and  in  its  exoteric  side  very  fully,  to  the  current  teach- 
ing of  the  Church.  The  doctrine  as  to  the  psychics,  capable  of  a 
limited  salvation,  appears  to  be  a  part  of  this  accommodation. 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  93 

I,  7,  5.  The  Valentinians  conceive  of  three  kinds  of  men: 
the  pneumatic  [or  spiritual],  the  choic  [or  material]/  and  the 
psychic  [or  animal];  such  were  Cain,  Abel,  and  Seth.  These 
three  natures  are  no  longer  in  one  person,  but  in  the  race. 
The  material  goes  to  destruction.  The  animal,  if  it  chooses 
the  better  part,  finds  repose  in  an  intermediate  place;  but  if 
it  chooses  the  worse,  it,  too,  goes  to  the  same  [destruction]. 
But  they  assert  that  the  spiritual  principles,  whatever  Aca- 
moth  has  sown,  being  discipHned  and  nourished  here  from 
that  time  until  now  in  righteous  souls,  because  they  were 
sent  forth  weak,  at  last  attain  perfection  and  shall  be  given 
as  brides^  to  the  angels  of  the  Saviour,  but  their  animal  souls 
necessarily  rest  forever  with  the  Demiurge  in  the  interme- 
diate place.  And  again  subdividing  the  animal  souls  them- 
selves, they  say  that  some  are  by  nature  good  and  others  are 
by  nature  evil.  The  good  are  those  who  become  capable  of 
receiving  the  seed;  the  evil  by  nature,  those  who  are  never 
able  to  receive  that  seed. 

I,  8,  23.  The  parable  of  the  leaven  which  the  woman  is 
said  to  have  hid  in  three  measures  of  meal  they  declare  mani- 
fests the  three  kinds  of  men:  pneumatic,  psychic,  and  the 
choic,  but  the  leaven  denoted  the  Saviour  himself.  Paul 
also  very  plainly  set  forth  the  choic,  the  psychic,  and  the 
pneumatic,  saying  in  one  place:  "As  is  the  earthy  [choic]  such 
are  they  also  that  are  earthy"  [I  Cor.  15  :  48];  and  in  another 
place,  "He  that  is  spiritual  [pneumatic]  Judgeth  all  things" 
[I  Cor.  2  :  14].  And  the  passage,  "The  animal  man  receiveth 
not  the  things  of  the  spirit"  [I  Cor.  2  :  15],  they  affirm  was 
spoken  concerning  the  Demiurge,  who,  being  psychic,  knew 
neither  his  mother,  who  was  spiritual,  nor  her  seed,  nor  the 
Eons  in  the  pleroma. 

(/)  Irensus,  Adv.  HcEr.,  I,  i.    (MSG,  7  1445/.) 

The  following  passage  appears,  from  the  context,  to  have  been 
written  with  the  teaching  of  Ptolomaeus  especially  in  mind.    It  should 

^  Generally  spoken  of  as  hylics. 

2  Cf.  introductory  note  to  following  selection. 


94  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

be  compared  with  the  account  further  on  in  the  same  book,  I,  ii:  1-3. 
The  syzygies  are  characteristic  of  the  Valentinian  teaching,  and  the 
symbolism  of  marriage  plays  an  important  part  in  the  "system"  of 
all  the  Valentinians.  In  the  words  of  Duchesne  {Hist,  ancienne  de 
Veglise,  sixth  ed.,  p.  171):  "Valentinian  Gnosticism  is  from  one  end 
to  the  other  a  'marriage  Gnosticism.'  From  the  most  abstract  origins 
of  being  to  their  end,  there  are  only  syzygies,  marriages,  and  genera- 
tions." For  the  connection  between  these  conceptions  and  anti- 
nomianism,  see  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Har.,  I,  6:3/.  For  their  sacramental 
appHcation,  ibid.,  I,  21 :  3.  C/.  1, 13  :  3,  a  passage  which  seems  to  belong 
to  the  sacrament  of  the  bridal  chamber. 

They  [the  Valentinians]  say  that  in  the  invisible  and  inef- 
fable heights  above  there  exists  a  certain  perfect,  pre-existent 
Eon,  and  him  they  call  Proarche,  Propator,  and  Bythos; 
and  that  he  is  invisible  and  that  nothing  is  able  to  comprehend 
him.  Since  he  is  comprehended  by  no  one,  and  is  invisible, 
eternal,  and  unbegotten,  he  was  in  silence  and  profound  qui- 
escence in  the  boundless  ages.  There  existed  along  with  him 
Ennoea,  whom  they  call  Charis  and  Sige.  And  at  a  certain 
time  this  Bythos  determined  to  send  forth  from  himself  the 
beginnings  of  all  things,  and  just  as  seed  he  wished  to  send 
forth  this  emanation,  and  he  deposited  it  in  the  womb  of  her 
who  was  with  him,  even  of  Sige.  She  then  received  this  seed, 
and  becoming  pregnant,  generated  Nous,  who  was  both 
similar  and  equal  to  him  who  had  sent  him  forth  ^  and  alone 
comprehended  his  father's  greatness.  This  Nous  they  also 
call  Monogenes  and  Father  and  the  Beginning  of  all  Things. 
Along  with  him  was  also  sent  forth  Aletheia;  and  these 
four  constituted  the  first  and  first-begotten  Pythagorean 
Tetrad,  which  also  they  denominate  the  root  of  all  things. 
For  there  are  first  Bythos  and  Sige,  and  then  Nous  and 
Aletheia.  And  Monogenes,  when  he  perceived  for  what 
purpose  he  had  been  sent  forth,  also  himself  sent  forth 
Logos  and  Zoe,  being  the  father  of  all  those  who  are  to  come 
after  him,  and  the  beginning  and  fashioning  of  the  entire 

^The  term  used  for  a  sending  forth  is  xpo^oXT^,  or  emanation,  and  is  con- 
stantly used  in  Gnosticism;  hence  the  objection  on  the  part  of  the  majority 
of  Christian  theologians  to  the  use  of  the  term  in  describing  the  relations  of 
the  members  of  the  Trinity. 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  95 

pleroma.  From  Logos  and  Zoe  were  sent  forth,  by  a  conjunc- 
tion, Anthropos  and  Ecclesia,  and  thus  were  formed  the  first- 
begotten  Ogdoad,  the  root  and  substance  of  all  things,  called 
among  them  by  four  names;  namely,  Bythos,  Nous,  Logos, 
and  Anthropos.  For  each  of  these  is  at  once  masculine  and 
feminine,  as  follows:  Propator  was  united  by  a  conjunction 
with  his  Ennoea,  then  Monogenes  (i.  e.,  Nous)  with  Aletheia, 
Logos  with  Zoe,  Anthropos  with  Ecclesia. 

(g)  Ptolomseus,  Epistula  ad  Floram,  ap.  Epiphanius,  Pan- 
arion,  Hcer.  XXXIII,  3.    Ed.  Oehler,  1859.     (MSG,  41  :  557.) 

Ptolomaeus  was  possibly  the  most  important  disciple  of  Valentinus, 
and  the  one  to  whom  Irenaeus  is  most  indebted  for  his  first-hand  knowl- 
edge of  the  teaching  of  the  sect  of  the  Valentinians.  Of  his  writings 
have  been  preserved,  in  addition  to  numerous  brief  fragments,  a  con- 
nected passage  of  some  length,  apparently  from  a  commentary  on  the 
Prologue  or  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  (see  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  8:5), 
and  the  Epistle  to  Flora.  The  commentary  is  distinctly  a  part  of  the 
esoteric  teaching,  the  epistle  is  as  clearly  exoteric. 

That  many  have  not  ^  received  the  Law  given  by  Moses, 
my  dear  sister  Flora,  without  recognizing  either  its  funda- 
mental ideas  or  its  precepts,  will  be  perfectly  clear  to  you, 
I  believe,  if  you  become  acquainted  with  the  different  views 
regarding  the  same.  For  some  [i.  e.,  the  Church]  say  that 
it  was  commanded  by  God  and  the  Father;  but  others  [i.  e,, 
the  Marcionites],  taking  the  opposite  direction,  affirm  that 
it  was  commanded  by  an  opposing  and  injurious  devil,  and 
they  attribute  to  him  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  say 
that  he  is  the  Father  and  Creator.  But  such  as  teach  such 
doctrine  are  altogether  deceived,  and  each  of  them  strays 
from  the  truth  of  what  lies  before  him.  For  it  appears  not 
to  have  been  given  by  the  perfect  God  and  Father,  because 
it  is  itself  imperfect,  and  it  needs  to  be  completed  [cf.  Matt. 
5  117],  and  it  has  precepts  not  consonant  with  the  nature  and 
mind  of  God;  neither  is  the  Law  to  be  attributed  to  the  wick- 

*  This  negative  seems  to  spoil  the  sense  of  the  passage,  and  is  omitted  in 
some  editions. 


96         THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

edness  of  the  adversary,  whose  characteristic  is  to  do  wrong. 
Such  do  not  know  what  was  spoken  by  the  Saviour,  that  a 
city  or  a  house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand,  as  our 
Saviour  has  shown  us.  And  besides,  the  Apostle  says  that 
the  creation  of  the  world  was  His  work  (all  things  were  made 
by  Him  and  without  Him  nothing  was  made),  refuting  the  un- 
substantial wisdom  of  lying  men,  the  work  not  of  a  god  work- 
ing ruin,  but  a  just  one  who  hates  wickedness.  This  is  the 
opinion  of  rash  men  who  do  not  understand  the  cause  of  the 
providence  of  the  Creator  [Demiurge]  and  have  lost  the  eyes 
not  only  of  their  soul,  but  of  their  body.  How  far,  therefore, 
such  wander  from  the  way  of  truth  is  evident  to  you  from 
what  has  been  said.  But  each  of  these  is  induced  by  some- 
thing peculiar  to  himself  to  think  thus,  some  by  ignorance 
of  the  God  of  righteousness :  others  by  ignorance  of  the  Father 
of  all,  whom  the  Only  One  who  knew  Him  alone  revealed  when 
He  came.  To  us  it  has  been  reserved  to  be  deemed  worthy 
of  making  manifest  to  you  the  ideas  of  both  of  these,  and  to 
investigate  carefully  this  Law,  whence  anything  is,  and  the 
law-giver  by  whom  it  was  commanded,  bringing  proofs  of 
what  shall  be  said  from  the  words  of  our  Saviour,  by  which 
alone  one  can  be  led  without  error  to  the  knowledge  of  things. 
First  of  all,  it  is  to  be  known  that  the  entire  Law  contained 
in  the  Pentateuch  of  Moses  was  not  given  by  one — I  mean  not 
by  God  alone;  but  some  of  its  precepts  were  given  by  men, 
and  the  words  of  the  Saviour  teach  us  to  divide  it  into  three 
parts.  For  He  attributes  some  of  it  to  God  himself  and  His 
law-giving,  and  some  to  Moses,  not  in  the  sense  that  God 
gave  laws  through  him,  but  in  the  sense  that  Moses,  impelled 
by  his  own  spirit,  set  down  some  things  as  laws;  and  He 
attributes  some  things  to  the  elders  of  the  people,  who  first 
discovered  certain  commandments  of  their  own  and  then 
inserted  them.  How  this  was  so  you  clearly  learn  from  the 
words  of  the  Saviour.  Somewhere  the  Saviour  was  convers- 
ing with  the  people,  who  disputed  with  Him  about  divorce, 
that  it  was  allowed  in  the  Law,  and  He  said  to  them:  Moses, 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC  SYSTEMS  97 

on  account  of  the  hardness  of  your  hearts,  permitted  a  man  to 
divorce  his  wife;  but  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so.  For 
God,  said  He,  joined  this  bond,  and  what  the  Lord  joined 
together  let  not  man,  He  said,  put  asunder.  He  therefore 
pointed  out  one  law  that  forbids  a  woman  to  be  separated 
from  her  husband,  which  was  of  God,  and  another,  which  was 
of  Moses,  that  allows,  on  account  of  the  hardness  of  men's 
hearts,  the  bond  to  be  dissolved.  And  accordingly,  Moses  gives 
a  law  opposed  to  God,  for  it  is  opposed  to  the  law  forbidding 
divorce.  But  if  we  consider  carefully  the  mind  of  Moses, 
according  to  which  he  thus  legislated,  we  shall  find  that  he 
did  not  do  this  of  his  own  mere  choice,  but  by  constraint 
because  of  the  weakness  of  those  to  whom  he  was  giving  the 
law.  For  since  they  were  not  able  to  observe  that  precept 
of  God  by  which  it  was  not  permitted  them  to  cast  forth 
their  wives,  with  whom  some  of  them  Hved  unhappily,  and 
because  of  this  they  were  in  danger  of  falHng  still  more  into 
unrighteousness,  and  from  that  into  utter  ruin,  Moses, 
intending  to  avoid  this  unhappy  result,  because  they  were 
in  danger  of  ruin,  gave  a  certain  second  law,  according  to 
circumstances  less  evil,  in  place  of  the  better;  and  by  his  own 
authority  gave  the  law  of  divorce  to  them,  that  if  they  could 
not  keep  that  they  might  keep  this,  and  should  not  fall  into 
unrighteousness  and  wickedness  by  which  complete  ruin 
should  overtake  them.  This  was  his  purpose  in  as  far  as  he 
is  found  giving  laws  contrary  to  God.  That  thus  the  law 
of  Moses  is  shown  to  be  other  than  the  Law  of  God  is  indis- 
putable, if  we  have  shown  it  in  one  instance. 

And  as  to  there  being  certain  traditions  of  the  elders  which 
have  been  incorporated  in  the  Law,  the  Saviour  shows  this  also. 
For  God,  said  He,  commanded:  Honor  thy  father  and  thy 
mother,  that  it  may  be  well  with  thee.  But  ye,  He  said, 
addressing  the  elders,  have  said:  It  is  a  gift  to  God,  that  by 
which  ye  might  be  profited  by  me,  and  ye  annul  the  law  of 
God  by  the  traditions  of  your  elders.  And  this  very  thing 
Isaiah  declared  when  he  said:    This  people  honor  me  with 


98  THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

their  lips,  but  their  heart  is  far  from  me,  vainly  do  they  wor- 
ship me,  teaching  the  doctrines  and  commandment  of  men  [cf. 
Matt.  15  14-9.]  Clearly,  then,  from  these  things  it  is  shown 
that  thiis  whole  Law  is  to  be  divided  into  three  parts.  And  in 
it  we  find  laws  given  by  Moses,  by  the  elders,  and, by  God; 
and  this  division  of  the  whole  Law  as  we  have  made  it,  has 
shown  the  real  truth  as  to  the  Law. 

But  one  portion  of  the  Law,  that  which  is  from  God,  is 
again  to  be  divided  into  three  parts:  first,  into  the  genuine 
precepts,  quite  untainted  with  evil,  which  is  properly  called 
the  law,  and  which  the  Saviour  came  not  to  destroy  but  to  com- 
plete (for  what  he  completed  was  not  alien  to  Him,  but  yet  it 
was  not  perfect) ;  secondly,  the  part  comprising  evil  and  un- 
righteous things,  which  the  Saviour  did  away  with  as  some- 
thing unfitting  His  nature;  and  thirdly,  the  part  which  is  for 
types  and  symbols,  which  is  given  as  a  law,  as  images  of  things 
spiritual  and  excellent  which,  from  being  evident  and  mani- 
fest to  the  senses,  the  Saviour  changed  into  the  spiritual  and 
unseen.  Now  the  law  of  God,  pure  and  untainted  with 
anything  base,  is  the  Decalogue  itself,  or  those  ten  precepts 
distributed  in  two  tables,  for  the  prohibition  of  things  to  be 
avoided  and  the  performance  of  things  to  be  done.  Although 
they  constitute  a  pure  body  of  laws,  yet  they  are  not  perfect, 
but  need  to  be  completed  by  the  Saviour.  But  there  is  that 
body  of  commands  which  are  tainted  with  unrighteousness; 
such  is  the  law  requiring  vengeance  and  requital  of  injuries 
upon  those  who  have  first  injured  us,  commanding  the  smiting 
out  of  an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth  and  revenging 
bloodshed  with  bloodshed.  For  one  who  is  second  in  doing 
unrighteousness  acts  no  less  unrighteously,  when  the  differ- 
ence is  only  one  of  order,  doing  the  self-same  work.  But 
such  a  precept  was,  and  is,  in  other  respects  just,  because  of 
the  infirmity  of  those  to  whom  the  law  was  given,  and  it 
was  given  in  violation  of  the  pure  law,  and  was  not  consonant 
with  the  nature  and  goodness  of  the  Father  of  all;  it  was  to 
a  degree  appropriate,  but  yet  given  under  a  certain  compul- 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  99 

sion.  For  he  who  forbids  the  commission  of  a  single  murder 
in  that  he  says,  Thou  shalt  not  kill,  but  commands  that  he 
who  kills  shall  in  requital  be  killed,  gives  a  second  law  and 
commands  a  second  sla}^ng,  when  he  has  forbidden  one,  and 
has  been  compelled  to  do  this  by  necessity.  And  therefore 
the  Son,  sent  by  Him,  abolishes  this  portion  of  the  Law,  He 
himself  confessing  that  it  is  from  God,  and  this,  among  other 
things,  is  to  be  attributed  to  an  ancient  heresy,  among  which, 
also,  is  that  God,  speaking,  says:  He  that  curseth  father  or 
mother,  let  him  die  the  death.  But  there  is  that  part  of  the 
Law  which  is  t^^ical,  lapng  down  that  which  is  an  image  of 
things  spiritual  and  excellent,  which  gives  laws  concerning 
such  matters  as  offerings,  I  mean,  and  circumcision,  the  Sab- 
bath and  fasting,  the  passover  and  the  unleavened  bread,  and 
such  like.  For  all  these  things,  being  images  and  symbols  of 
the  truth  which  had  been  manifested,  have  been  changed. 
They  were  abrogated  so  far  as  they  were  external,  visible  acts 
of  bodily  performance,  but  they  were  retained  so  far  as  they 
were  spiritual,  the  names  remaining,  but  the  things  being 
changed.  For  the  Saviour  commands  us  to  present  offerings, 
though  not  of  irrational  animals  or  of  incense,  but  spiritual 
ojfferings — praise,  glory,  and  thanksgiving,  and  also  liberality 
and  good  deeds  toward  the  neighbor.  He  would  have  us 
circumcised  with  a  circumcision  not  of  the  flesh,  but  spiritual 
and  of  the  heart;  and  have  us  observe  the  Sabbath,  for  he 
wishes  us  to  rest  from  wicked  actions;  and  fast,  but  he  does 
not  wish  us  to  observe  a  bodily  fast,  but  a  spiritual,  in  that 
we  abstain  from  all  that  is  unworthy.  External  fasting,  how- 
ever, is  observed  among  our  people,  since  it  is  capable  of 
benefiting  the  soul  to  some  degree,  if  it  is  practised  with 
reason,  when  it  is  neither  performed  from  imitation  of  any 
one,  nor  by  custom,  nor  on  account  of  a  day,  as  if  a  day  were 
set  apart  for  that  purpose;  and  at  the  same  time  it  is  also 
for  a  reminder  of  true  fasting,  that  they  who  are  not  able 
to  fast  thus  may  have  a  reminder  of  it  from  the  fast  which  is 
external.    And  that  the  passover,  in  the  same  way,  and  the 


loo        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

unleavened  bread  are  images,  the  Apostle  Paul  also  makes 
clear,  saying:  Christ  our  Passover  is  sacrificed  for  us,  and 
That  ye  may  be  unleavened,  not  having  any  leaven  (for  he 
calls  leaven  wickedness),  but  that  ye  may  be  a  new  dough. 

This  entire  Law,  therefore,  acknowledged  to  be  from  God, 
is  divided  into  three  parts:  into  that  part  which  is  fulfilled 
by  the  Saviour,  such  as  Thou  shalt  not  kill,  thou  shalt  not 
commit  adultery,  thou  shalt  not  forswear  thyself,  for  they 
are  included  in  this,  thou  shalt  not  be  angry,  thou  shalt  not 
lust,  thou  shalt  not  swear;  into  that  which  is  completely 
abolished,  such  as  an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth, 
being  tainted  with  unrighteousness,  and  having  the  same 
work  of  unrighteousness,  and  these  are  taken  away  by  the 
Saviour  because  contradictory  (for  those  things  which  are  con- 
tradictory are  mutually  destructive),  "For  I  say  unto  you 
that  ye  in  no  wise  resist  evil,  but  if  any  one  smite  thee  turn 
to  him  the  other  cheek  also'';  and  into  that  part  which  is 
changed  and  converted  from  that  which  is  bodily  into  that 
which  is  spiritual,  as  he  expounds  allegorically  a  symbol  which 
is  commanded  as  an  image  of  things  that  are  excellent.  For 
these  images  and  symbols,  fitted  to  represent  other  things, 
were  good  so  long  as  the  truth  was  not  yet  present;  but  when 
the  truth  is  present,  it  is  necessary  to  do  the  things  of  truth, 
not  the  image  of  truth.  The  same  thing  his  disciples  and  the 
Apostle  Paul  teach,  inasmuch  as  in  regard  to  things  which  are 
images,  as  we  have  already  said,  they  show  by  the  passover 
and  the  unleavened  bread  that  they  are  for  our  sake,  but  in 
regard  to  the  law  which  is  tainted  with  unrighteousness,  they 
call  it  the  law  of  commandments  and  ordinances,  that  is 
done  away;  but  as  to  the  law  which  is  untainted  with  evil, 
he  says  that  the  law  is  holy  and  the  commandment  holy  and 
just  and  good. 

Accordingly,  I  think  that  it  has  been  sufficiently  shown  you, 
so  far  as  it  is  possible  to  discuss  the  matter  briefly,  that  there 
are  laws  of  men  which  have  slipped  in,  and  there  is  the  very 
Law  of  God  which  is  divided  into  three  parts.    There  remains, 


THE   GREATER   GNOSTIC   SYSTEMS  loi 

therefore,  for  us  to  show,  who,  then,  is  that  God  who  gave  the 
Law.  But  I  think  that  this  has  been  shown  you  in  what 
has  already  been  said,  if  you  have  listened  attentively.  For 
if  the  Law  was  not  given  by  the  perfect  God,  as  we  have  shown, 
nor  by  the  devil,  which  idea  merely  to  mention  is  unlawful, 
there  is  another  beside  these,  one  who  gave  the  Law.  This 
one  is,  therefore,  the  Demiurge  and  maker  of  this  whole 
world  and  of  all  things  in  it,  different  from  the  nature  of  the 
other  two,  and  placed  between  them,  and  who  therefore 
rightly  bears  the  name  of  the  Midst.  And  if  the  perfect  God 
is  good  according  to  His  own  nature,  as  also  He  is  (for  that 
there  is  only  One  who  is  good,  namely,  God  and  His  Father, 
the  Saviour  asserted,  the  God  whom  He  manifested),  there  is 
also  one  who  is  of  the  nature  of  the  adversary,  bad  and 
wicked  and  characterized  by  unrighteousness.  Standing, 
therefore,  between  these,  and  being  neither  good  nor  bad  nor 
unjust,  he  can  be  called  righteous  in  a  sense  proper  to  him, 
as  the  judge  of  the  righteousness  that  corresponds  to  him, 
and  that  god  will  be  lower  than  the  perfect  God,  and  his 
righteousness  lower  than  His,  because  he  is  begotten  and  not 
unbegotten.  For  there  is  one  unbegotten  One,  the  Father, 
from  whom  are  all  things,  for  all  things  have  been  prepared 
by  Him.  But  He  is  greater  and  superior  to  the  adversary,  and 
is  of  a  different  essence  or  nature  from  the  essence  of  the  other. 
For  the  essence  of  the  adversary  is  corruption  and  darkness, 
for  he  is  hylic  and  composite,^  but  the  essence  of  the  un- 
begotten Father  of  all  is  incorruptibihty,  and  He  is  light 
itself,  simple  and  uniform.  But  the  essence  of  these^  brings 
forth  a  certain  twofold  power,  and  he  is  the  image  of  the  better. 
Do  not  let  these  things  disturb  you,  who  wish  to  learn  how 
from  one  principle  of  all  things,  whom  we  acknowledge  and 
in  whom  be  believe,  namely,  the  unbegotten  and  the  incor- 
ruptible and  the  good,  there  exist  two  other  natures,  namely, 
that  of  corruption  and  that  of  the  Midst,  which  are  not  of 

^  Simplicity  is  always  regarded  in  ancient  thought  as  a  characteristic  of  Deity. 
*  According  to  another  reading,  of  this  one. 


I02        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

the  same  essence  [avo/jLoovaiot],  though  the  good  by  nature 
begets  and  brings  forth  what  is  Hke  itself,  and  of  the  same 
essence  [o/jLoovaio^;].  For  you  will  learn  by  God's  permis- 
sion, in  due  order,  both  the  beginning  of  this  and  its  gener- 
ation, since  you  are  deemed  worthy  of  the  apostolic  tradition, 
which  by  a  succession  we  have  received,  and  in  due  season  to 
test  all  things  by  the  teaching  of  the  Saviour.  The  things  which 
in  a  few  words  I  have  said  to  you,  my  sister  Flora,  I  have  not 
exhausted,  and  I  have  written  briefly.  At  the  same  time  I 
have  sufficiently  explained  to  you  the  subject  proposed,  and 
what  I  have  said  will  be  constantly  of  use  to  you,  if  as  a  beauti- 
ful and  good  field  you  have  received  the  seed  and  will  by 
it  produce  fruit. 

^  §  23.    Marcion 

Recently  Marcion  has  been  commonly  treated  apart  from 
the  Gnostics  on  account  of  the  large  use  he  made  of  the 
Pauline  writings.  By  some  he  has  even  been  regarded  as  a 
champion  of  Pauline  ideas  which  had  failed  to  hold  a  place 
in  Christian  thought.  This  opinion  of  Marcion  is  being 
modified  under  the  influence  of  a  larger  knowledge  of  Gnosti- 
cism. At  the  bottom  Marcion's  doctrine  was  thoroughly 
Gnostic,  though  he  differed  from  the  vast  majority  of  Gnostics 
in  that  his  interest  seems  to  have  been  primarily  ethical  rather 
than  speculative.  His  school  maintained  itself  for  some 
centuries  after  undergoing  some  minor  modifications.  Mar- 
cion was  teaching  at  Rome,  A.  D,  140.  The  aspersions  upon 
his  moral  character  must  be  taken  with  caution,  as  it  had 
already  become  a  common  practice  to  blacken  the  character 
of  theological  opponents,  regardless  of  the  truth,  a  custom 
which  has  not  yet  wholly  disappeared. 

Additional  source  material:  Justin  Martyr,  ApoL,  I,  26,  58;  Ire- 
naeus,  III,  12  :  12  Jf.  The  most  important  source  is  Tertullian's  elaborate 
Adversus  Marcionem,  especially  I,  i  /.,  29;  III,  8,  11, 

G  Xa)  Irenasus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  27  :  1-3.    (MSG,  7  :  687.) 
The  system  of  Cerdo  and  Marcion. 


MARCION  103 

Ch.  I.  A  certain  Cerdo,  who  had  taken  his  fundamental 
ideas  from  those  who  were  with  Simon  [i.  e.,  Simon  Magus], 
and  who  was  in  Rome  in  the  time  of  Hyginus,  who  held  the 
ninth  place  from  the  Apostles  in  the  episcopal  succession, 
taught  that  the  God  who  was  preached  by  the  law  and  the 
prophets  is  not  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  For  the 
former  is  known,  but  the  latter  is  unknown;  and  the  former 
is  righteous,  but  the  other  is  good. 

Ch.  2.  And  Marcion  of  Pontus  succeeded  him  and  devel- 
oped a  school,  blaspheming  shamelessly  Him  who  is  proclaimed 
as  God  by  the  law  and  the  prophets;  saying  that  He  is  maker 
of  evils  arid-a  lover  of  wars,  inconstant  in  purpose  and  incon- 
sistent with  Himself.  He  said,  however,  that  Jesus  came  from 
the  Father,  who  is  above  the  God  who  made  the  world, 
into  Judea  in  the  time  of  Pontius  Pilate,  the  procurator  of 
Tiberius  Caesar,  and  was  manifested  in  the  form  of  a  man  to 
those  who  were  in  Judea,  destroying  the  prophets  and  the 
law,  and  all  the  works  of  that  God  who  made  the  world  and 
whom  he  also  called  Cosmocrator.  In  addition  to  this,  he 
mutilated  the  Gospel  which  is  according  to  Luke,  and  removed 
all  that  refers  to  the  generation  of  the  Lord,  removing  also 
many  things  from  the  teaching  in  the  Lord's  discourses,  in 
which  the  Lord  is  recorded  as  very  plainly  confessing  that 
the  founder  of  this  universe  is  His  Father;  and  thus  Marcion 
persuaded  his  disciples  that  he  himself  is  truer  than  the 
Apostles  who  delivered  the  Gospel;  deHvering  to  them  not 
the  Gospel  but  a  part  of  the  Gospel.  But  in  the  same  manner 
he  also  mutilated  the  epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  removing 
all  that  is  plainly  said  by  the  Apostle  concerning  that  God 
who  made  the  world,  to  the  effect  that  He  is  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  all  that  the  Apostle  taught  by  quo- 
tation from  the  prophetical  writings  which  foretold  the  coming 
of  the  Lord. 

Ch.  3.  He  taught  that  salvation  would  be  only  of  the  souls 
of  those  who  should  receive  his  doctrine,  and  that  it  is  impos- 
sible for  the  body  to  partake  of  salvation,  because  it  was 
taken  from  the  earth. 


I04        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

(b)  Tertullian,  Adv.  Marcion.,  1,  19;  IV,  2,  3.    (MSL,  2  :  293, 

393-) 

Tertullian's  great  work  against  Marcion  is  his  most  important  and 
most  carefully  written  polemical  treatise.  He  revised  it  three  times. 
The  first  book  of  the  present  revision  dates  from  A.  D.  207;  the  other 
books  cannot  be  dated  except  conjecturally.  In  spite  of  the  openly 
displayed  hostile  animus  of  the  writer,  it  can  be  used  with  confidence 
when  controlled  by  reference  to  other  sources. 

I,  19.  Marcion's  special  and  principal  work  is  the  separa- 
tion of  the  law  and  the  Gospel;  and  his  disciples  will  not  be 
able  to  deny  that  in  this  they  have  their  best  means  by 
which  they  are  initiated  into,  and  confirmed  in,  this  heresy. 
For  these  are  Marcion's  antitheses — that  is,  contradictory 
propositions;  and  they  aim  at  putting  the  Gospel  at  variance 
with  the  law,  that  from  the  diversity  of  the  statements  of 
the  two  documents  they  may  argue  for  a  diversity  of  gods,  also. 

IV,  2.  With  Marcion  the  mystery  of  the  Christian  relig- 
ion dates  from  the  discipleship  of  Luke.  Since,  however,  it 
was  under  way  previously,  it  must  have  had  its  authentic 
materials  by  means  of  which  it  found  its  way  down  to  Luke; 
and  by  aid  of  the  testimony  which  it  bore  Luke  himself 
becomes  admissible. 

IV,  3.  Well,  but  because  Marcion  finds  the  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians  by  Paul,  who  rebukes  even  Apostles  for  "not  walking 
uprightly  according  to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel"  [Gal.  2  :  14], 
as  well  as  accuses  certain  false  apostles  of  being  perverters 
of  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  he  attempts  to  destroy  the  standing 
of  those  gospels  which  are  pubHshed  as  genuine  and  under 
the  names  of  Apostles,  or  of  apostolic  men,  to  secure,  for- 
sooth, for  his  own  gospel  the  credit  he  takes  away  from  them. 

(c)  Rhodon,  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec.,Y,  13.    (MSG,  20  :  459.) 

At  this  time  Rhodon,  a  native  of  Asia,  who,  as  he  himself 
states,  had  been  instructed  at  Rome  by  Tatian,  with  whom 
we  have  already  become  acquainted,  wrote  excellent  books, 
and  pubHshed  among  the  rest  one  against  the  heresy  of 
Marcion  which,  he  says,  was  in  his  time  divided  into  various 


ENCRATITES  105 

sects;  and  he  describes  those  who  occasioned  the  division 
and  refutes  carefully  the  falsehood  devised  by  each.  But  hear 
what  he  writes:  "Therefore  also  they  have  fallen  into  dis- 
agreement among  themselves,  and  maintain  inconsistent 
opinions.  For  Apelles,  one  of  their  herd,  priding  himself  on 
his  manner  of  Hfe  and  his  age,  acknowledged  one  principle 
[i.  e.,  source  of  existence],  but  says  that  the  prophecies  were 
from  an  opposing  spirit.  And  he  was  persuaded  of  the  truth 
of  this  by  the  responses  of  a  demoniac  maiden  named  Phi- 
lumene.  But  others  hold  to  two  principles,  as  does  the  mar- 
iner Marcion  himself,  among  these  are  Potitus  and  Basi- 
liscus.  These,  following  the  wolf  of  Pontus  and,  like  him, 
unable  to  discover  the  divisions  of  things,  became  reckless, 
and  without  any  proof  baldly  asserted  two  principles.  Again, 
others  of  them  drifted  into  worse  error  and  assumed  not  only 
two,  but  three,  natures.  Of  these  Syneros  is  the  leader 
and  chief,  as  those  say  who  defend  his  teaching." 

§  24.    Encratites 

Asceticism  is  a  wide-spread  phenomenon  in  nearly  all  relig- 
ions. It  is  to  be  found  in  apostolic  Christianity.  In  the  early 
Church  it  was  regarded  as  a  matter  in  the  option  of  the  Chris- 
tian who  was  aiming  at  the  rehgious  life  [see  above,  §  16]. 
The  characteristic  of  the  Encratites  was  their  insistence  upon 
asceticism  as  essential  to  Christian  living.  They  were  there- 
fore associated,  and  with  abundant  historical  justification, 
with  Gnosticism. 

Additional  source  material:  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Strom.,  Ill, 
passim;  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  29,  cf.  the  many  references  in  the 
notes  to  McGiffert's  edition,  PNF. 

(a)  Hippolytus,  VIII,  13.     (MSG,  16  :  3368.) 
See  above,  §  ig,  c. 

Others,  however,  styling  themselves  Encratites,  acknowl- 
edge some  things  concerning  God  and  Christ  in  like  manner 


io6        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

with  the  Church,  but  in  respect  to  their  mode  of  life  they 
pass  their  time  inflated  with  pride;  thinking  that  by  meats 
they  glorify  themselves,  they  abstain  from  animal  food,  are 
water  drinkers,  and,  forbidding  to  marry,  they  devote  the  rest 
of  their  Hfe  to  habits  of  asceticism. 

(b)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  I,  28.     (MSG,  7  :  690.) 

Many  offshoots  of  numerous  heresies  have  already  been 
formed  from  those  heresies  which  we  have  described.  .  .  . 
By  way  of  example,  let  us  say  there  are  those  springing  from 
Saturninus  and  Marcion,  who  are  called  Encratites  [i.  e.,  self- 
controlled],  who  preached  the  unmarried  state,  thus  setting 
aside  the  original  creation  of  God,  and  indirectly  condemn- 
ing Him  who  made  male  and  female  for  the  propagation  of 
the  human  race.  Some  of  those  reckoned  as  belonging  to 
them  have  also  introduced  abstinence  from  animal  food,  being 
ungrateful  to  God  who  created  all  things.  They  deny,  also, 
the  salvation  of  him  who  was  first  created.  It  is  but  recently 
that  this  opinion  has  been  discovered  among  them,  since  a 
certain  man  named  Tatian  first  introduced  the  blasphemy. 
He  had  been  a  hearer  of  Justin's,  and  as  long  as  he  continued 
with  him  he  expressed  no  such  views;  but  after  his  martyr- 
dom [circa  A.  D.  165]  he  separated  from  the  Church,  and 
having  become  excited  and  puffed  up  by  the  thought  of  being 
a  teacher,  as  if  he  were  superior  to  others,  he  composed  his 
own  peculiar  type  of  doctrine.  He  invented  a  system  of 
certain  invisible  Eons,  like  the  followers  of  Valentinus;  and, 
like  Marcion  and  Saturninus,  he  declared  that  marriage  was 
nothing  else  than  corruption  and  fornication.  But  this 
denial  of  Adam's  salvation  was  an  opinion  due  entirely  to 
himself. 

§  25.      MONTANISM 

Montanism  was,  in  part  at  least,  an  attempt  to  revive  the 
enthusiastic  prophetic  element  in  the  early  Christian  life.  In 
its  first  manifestations,  in  Asia  Minor,  Montanism  was  wild 


MONTANISM 


107 


and  fanatical.  It  soon  spread  to  the  West,  and  in  doing  so 
it  became,  as  did  other  Oriental  religious  movements  {e.  g., 
Gnosticism  and  Manichaeanism,  see  §  54),  far  more  sober. 
It  even  seemed  to  many  serious  persons  to  be  nothing  more 
than  a  praiseworthy  attempt  to  revive  or  retain  certain 
primitive  Christian  conditions,  both  in  respect  to  personal 
morals  and  ecclesiastical  organization  and  life.  In  this  way 
it  came  to  be  patronized  by  not  a  few  {e.  g.,  Tertullian)  who, 
in  other  respects,  deviated  in  few  or  no  points  from  the  pre- 
vaihng  thought  and  practice  of  Christians.    See  also  §  26. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  16-19,  ^f-  lit- 
erature cited  in  McGiffert's  notes.  The  sayings  of  Montanus,  Maxi- 
milla,  and  Priscilla  are  collected  in  Hilgenfeld,  Ketzergeschichie,  591  ff. 
See  also  Hippolytus,  Refui.,  X,  25/.     [=  X,  21,  ANF.] 

(a)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  16:7.     (MSG,  20:463.) 
For  Eusebius,  see  §  3. 

There  is  said  to  be  a  certain  village  named  Ardabau,  in 
Mysia,  on  the  borders  of  Phrygia.  There,  they  say,  when 
Gratus  was  proconsul  of  Asia,  a  recent  convert,  Montanus 
by  name^who,  in  his  boundless  desire  for  leadership,  gave 
the  adversary  opportunity  against  him — first  became  inspired; 
and  faUing  into  a  sort  of  frenzy  and  ecstasy  raved  and  be- 
gan to  babble  and  utter  strange  sounds,  prophesying  in  a 
manner  contrary  to  the  traditional  and  constant  custom  of 
the  Church  from  the  beginning.  .  .  .  And  he  stirred  up, 
besides,  two  women  [Maximilla  and  Priscilla],  and  filled  them 
with  the  false  spirit,  so  that  they  talked  frantically,  at  un- 
seasonable times,  and  in  a  strange  manner,  like  the  person 
already  mentioned.  .  .  .  And  the  arrogant  spirit  taught  them 
to  revile  the  universal  and  entire  Church  under  heaven,  be- 
cause the  spirit  of  false  prophecy  received  from  it  neither 
honor  nor  entrance  into  it;  for  the  faithful  in  Asia  met  often 
and  in  many  places  throughout  Asia  to  consider  this  matter 
and  to  examine  the  recent  utterances,  and  they  pronounced 
them  profane  and  rejected  the  heresy,  and  thus  these  persons 


io8        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

were  expelled  from  the  Church  and  shut  out  from  the  com- 
munion. 

(b)  Apollonius,  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  i8.    (MSG,  20  : 

475-) 

Apollonius  was  possibly  bishop  of  Ephesus.  His  work  against  the 
Montanists,  which  appears  to  have  been  written  about  197,  was  one 
of  the  principal  sources  for  Eusebius  in  his  account  of  the  Montanists. 
Only  fragments  of  his  work  have  been  preserved. 

This  is  he  who  taught  the  dissolution  of  marriages;  who 
laid  down  laws  for  fasting;  who  named  Pepuza  and  Tymion 
(which  were  small  cities  in  Phrygia)  Jerusalem,  desiring  to 
gather  people  to  them  from  everywhere;  who  appointed  col- 
lectors of  money;  who  devised  the  receiving  of  gifts  under 
the  name  of  offerings;  who  provided  salaries  for  those  who 
preached  his  doctrine,  so  that  by  gluttony  the  teaching  of  his 
doctrine  might  prevail. 

(c)  Hippolytus,  RefuL,  VIII,  19.     (MSG,  16  :  3356.) 
For  Hippolytus,  see  §  ig,  c. 

But  there  are  others  who  are  themselves  in  nature  more 
heretical  than  the  Quartodecimans.  These  are  Phrygians  by 
birth  and  they  have  been  deceived,  having  been  overcome  by 
certain  women  called  Priscilla  and  Maximilla;  and  they  hold 
these  for  prophetesses,  saying  that  in  them  the  Paraclete 
Spirit  dwelt;  and  they  likewise  glorify  one  Montanus  before 
these  women  as  a  prophet.  So,  having  endless  books  of  these 
people,  they  go  astray,  and  they  neither  judge  their  statements 
by  reason  nor  pay  attention  to  those  who  are  able  to  judge. 
But  they  behave  without  judgment  in  the  faith  they  place 
in  them,  saying  they  have  learned  something  more  through 
them  than  from  the  law  and  the  prophets  and  the  Gospels. 
But  they  glorify  these  women  above  the  Apostles  and  every 
gift,  so  that  some  of  them  presume  to  say  that  there  was 
something  more  in  them  than  in  Christ.  These  confess  God 
the  Father  of  the  universe  and  creator  of  all  things,  like  the 
Church,  and  all  that  the  Gospel  witnesses  concerning  Christ, 


MONTANISM  109 

but  invent  new  fasts  and  feasts  and  meals  of  dry  food  and 
meals  of  radishes,  saying  that  thus  they  were  taught  by  their 
women.  And  some  of  them  agree  with  the  heresy  of  the  Noe- 
tians  and  say  that  the  Father  is  very  Son,  and  that  this  One 
became  subject  to  birth  and  suffering  and  death. 

CHAPTER  III.     THE   DEFENCE   AGAINST  HERESY 

The  Church  first  met  the  various  dangerous  heresies  which 
distracted  it  in  the  second  century  by  councils  or  gatherings 
of  bishops  (§  26).  Although  it  was  not  difficult  to  bring  about 
a  condemnation  of  novel  and  manifestly  erroneous  doctrine, 
there  was  need  of  fixed  norms  and  definite  authorities  to  which 
to  appeal.  This  was  found  in  the  apostoHc  tradition,  which 
could  be  more  clearly  determined  by  reference  to  the  continu- 
ity of  the  apostohc  office,  or  the  episcopate,  and  especially  to 
the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  churches  founded  by  Apostles 
(§  27),  the  apostolic  witness  to  the  truth,  or  the  more  precise 
determination  of  what  writings  should  be  regarded  as  apos- 
tolic, or  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  (§  28) ;  and  the  apos- 
toHc faith,  which  was  regarded  as  summed  up  in  the  Apostles' 
Creed  (§  29).  These  norms  of  orthodoxy  seem  to  have  been 
generally  established  as  authoritative  somewhat  earlier  in  the 
West  than  in  the  East.  The  result  was  that  Gnosticism  was 
rapidly  expelled  from  the  Church,  though  in  some  forms  it  lin- 
gered for  centuries  (§  30),  and  that  the  Church,  becoming 
organized  around  the  episcopate,  assumed  by  degrees  a  rigid 
hierarchical  constitution  (§  31). 

§  26.  The  Beginnings  of  Councils  as  a  Defence  against 
Heresy. 

§  27.   The  Apostolic  Tradition  and  the  Episcopate. 

§  28.  The  Canon  or  the  Authoritative  New  Testament 
Writings. 

§  29.   The  Apostles'  Creed. 

§  30.   Later  Gnostics. 

§  31.   Results  of  the  Crisis. 


no        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 


§  26.    Councils  as  a  Defence  against  Heresy 

Ecclesiastical  councils  were  the  first  defence  against  heresy. 
As  the  Church  had  not  as  yet  attained  its  hierarchical  constitu- 
tion and  the  autonomy  of  the  local  church  still  persisted, 
these  councils  had  little  more  than  the  combined  authority 
of  the  several  members  composing  them.  They  had,  as  yet, 
only  moral  force,  and  did  not  speak  for  the  Church  ofificially. 
With  the  development  of  the  episcopal  constitution,  the 
councils  gained  rapidly  in  authority. 

Additional  source  material:  See  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  16  (given 
above,  §  25,  a),  V,  24;   Tertullian,  De  Jejun.,  13. 

{a)  Lihellus  Synodicus,  Man.  I,  723. 

For  a  discussion  of  the  credibility  of  the  Lihellus  Synodicus,  a  com- 
pilation of  the  ninth  century,  see  Hef ele,  History  of  the  Councils,  §  i . 

A  holy  and  provincial  synod  was  held  at  Hierapolis  in  Asia 
by  Apollinarius,  the  most  holy  bishop  of  that  city,  and  twenty- 
six  other  bishops.  In  this  synod  Montanus  and  Maximilla, 
the  false  prophets,  and  at  the  same  time,  Theodotus  the 
tanner,  were  condemned  and  expelled.  A  holy  and  local 
synod  was  gathered  under  the  most  holy  Bishop  Sotas  of 
Anchialus^  and  twelve  other  bishops,  who  condemned  and 
rejected  Theodotus  the  tanner  and  Montanus  together  with 
Maximilla. 

{h)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  18.  (MSG,  20:475.)  Q"- 
Mirbt,  n.  21. 

The  following  should  be  connected  with  the  first  attempts  of  the 
Church  to  meet  the  heresy  of  the  Montanists  by  gatherings  of  bishops. 
It  also  throws  some  Hght  on  the  methods  of  deahng  wi^^h  the  new 
prophets. 

Serapion,  who,  according  to  report,  became  bishop  of 
Antioch  at  that  time,  after  Maximinus,  mentions  the  works 

*  A  city  of  Thrace  on  the  Black  Sea. 


THE  APOSTOLIC  TRADITION  iii 

of  Apollinarius  against  the  above-mentioned  heresy.  And  he 
refers  to  him  in  a  private  letter  to  Caricus  and  Pontius,  in 
which  he  himself  exposes  the  same  heresy,  adding  as  follows: 
''That  you  may  see  that  the  doings  of  this  lying  band  of  new 
prophecy,  as  it  is  called,  are  an  abomination  to  all  the  brethren 
throughout  the  world,  I  have  sent  you  writings  of  the  most 
blessed  Claudius  ApoUinarius,  bishop  of  HierapoKs  in  Asia." 
In  the  same  letter  of  Serapion  are  found  the  signatures  of 
several  bishops,  of  whom  one  has  subscribed  himself  as  fol- 
lows: "I,  Aurelius  Cyrenius,  a  witness,  pray  for  your  health." 
And  another  after  this  manner:  "^Elius  PubHus  JuHus, 
bishop  of  Debeltum,  a  colony  of  Thrace.  As  God  liveth  in 
the  heavens,  the  blessed  Sotas  in  Anchialus  desired  to  cast 
the  demon  out  of  Priscilla,  but  the  hypocrites  would  not 
permit  him."  And  the  autograph  signatures  of  many  other 
bishops  who  agreed  with  them  are  contained  in  the  same 
letter. 

§  27.  The  Apostolic  Tradition  and  the  Episcopate 

The  Gnostics  claimed  apostolic  authority  for  their  teaching 
and  appealed  to  successions  of  teachers  who  had  handed 
down  their  teachings.  This  procedure  forced  the  Church  to 
lay  stress  upon  the  obvious  fact  that  its  doctrine  was  derived 
from  the  Apostles,  a  matter  on  which  it  never  had  had  any 
doubt,  but  was  vouched  for,  not  by  obscure  teachers,  but 
by  the  churches  which  had  been  founded  by  the  Apostles 
themselves  in  large  cities  and  by  the  bishops  whom  the  Apos- 
tles had  instituted  in  those  churches.  Those  churches, 
furthermore,  agreed  among  themselves,  but  the  Gnostic 
teachers  differed  widely.  By  this  appeal  the  bishop  came 
to  represent  the  apostolic  order  (for  an  earlier  conception, 
V.  supra,  §  14,  bj  c),  and  to  take  an  increasingly  important 
place  in  the  church  (v.  infra,  §  31). 

Additional  source  material:  For  Gnostic  references  to  successions 
of  teachers,  see  Tertullian,  De  Prcescr.,  25;  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
Strom.,  VII,  17;   Hippolytus,  RefiiL,  VII,  20.     (=  VII,  8,  ANF.) 


112        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

(a)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  HcBr.,  Ill,  3  :  1-4.  (MSG,  7  :  848.)  Cf. 
Mirbt,  n.  30. 

The  first  appearance  of  the  appeal  to  apostolic  tradition  as  pre- 
served in  apostolic  sees  is  the  following  passage  from  Irenaeus,  written 
about  175.  The  reference  to  the  church  of  Rome,  beginning,  ''For 
with  this  Church,  on  account  of  its  more  powerful  leadership,"  has 
been  a  famous  point  of  discussion.  While  it  is  obscure  in  detail,  the 
application  of  its  general  purport  to  the  argument  of  Irenasus  is  clear. 
Since  for  this  passage  we  have  not  the  original  Greek  of  Irenaeus,  but 
only  the  Latin  translation,  there  seems  to  be  no  way  of  clearing  up  the 
obscurities  and  apparently  contradictory  statements.  The  text  may  be 
found  in  Gwatkin,  op.  ciL,  and  in  part  in  Kirch,  op.  cit.,  §§  110-113. 

Ch.  I.  The  tradition,  therefore,  of  the  Apostles,  manifested 
throughout  the  world,  is  a  thing  which  all  who  wish  to  see 
the  facts  can  clearly  perceive  in  every  church;  and  we  are 
able  to  count  up  those  who  were  appointed  bishops  by  the 
Apostles,  and  to  show  their  successors  to  our  own  time,  who 
neither  taught  nor  knew  anything  resembhng  these  men's 
ravings.  For  if  the  Apostles  had  known  hidden  mysteries 
which  they  used  to  teach  the  perfect,  apart  from  and  without 
the  knowledge  of  the  rest,  they  would  have  delivered  them 
especially  to  those  to  whom  they  were  also  committing  the 
churches  themselves.  For  they  desired  them  to  be  very  per- 
fect and  blameless  in  all  things,  and  were  also  leaving  them  as 
their  successors,  delivering  over  to  them  their  own  proper 
place  of  teaching;  for  if  these  should  act  rightly  great  advan- 
tage would  result,  but  if  they  fell  away  the  most  disastrous 
calamity  would  occur. 

Ch.  2.  But  since  it  would  be  very  long  in  such  a  volume 
as  this  to  count  up  the  successions  [i.  e.,  series  of  bishops] 
in  all  the  churches,  we  confound  all  those  who  in  any 
way,  whether  through  self-pleasing  or  vainglory,  or  through 
blindness  and  evil  opinion,  gather  together  otherwise  than 
they  ought,  by  pointing  out  the  tradition  derived  from  the 
Apostles  of  the  greatest,  most  ancient,  and  universally  known 
Church,  founded  and  established  by  the  two  most  glorious 
Apostles,   Peter  and  Paul,   and  also   the  faith  declared  to 


THE  APOSTOLIC  TRADITION  113 

men  which  through  the  succession  of  bishops  comes  down 
to  our  times.  For  with  this  Church,  on  account  of  its  more 
powerful  leadership  [potior em  principalitatem],  every  church, 
that  is,  the  faithful,  who  are  from  everywhere,  must  needs 
agree;  since  in  it  that  tradition  which  is  from  the  Apostles  has 
always  been  preserved  by  those  who  are  from  everywhere. 

Ch.  3.  The  blessed  Apostles  having  founded  and  estab- 
lished the  Church,  intrusted  the  ofhce  of  the  episcopate  to 
Linus.^  Paul  speaks  of  this  Linus  in  his  Epistles  to  Timo- 
thy. Anacletus  succeeded  him,  and  after  Anacletus,  in  the 
third  place  from  the  Apostles,  Clement  received  the  epis- 
copate. He  had  seen  and  conversed  with  the  blessed  Apos- 
tles, and  their  preaching  was  still  sounding  in  his  ears  and 
their  tradition  was  still  before  his  eyes.  Nor  was  he  alone 
in  this,  for  many  who  had  been  taught  by  the  Apostles  yet 
survived.  In  the  times  of  Clement,  a  serious  dissension  hav- 
ing arisen  among  the  brethren  in  Corinth,  the  Church  of 
Rome  sent  a  suitable  letter  to  the  Corinthians,  reconcihng 
them  in  peace,  renewing  their  faith,  and  proclaiming  the  doc- 
trine lately  received  from  the  Apostles.  .  .  . 

Evaristus  succeeded  Clement,  and  Alexander  Evaristus. 
Then  Sixtus,  the  sixth  from  the  Apostles,  was  appointed. 
After  him  Telesephorus,  who  suffered  martyrdom  gloriously, 
and  then  Hyginus;  after  him  Pius,  and  after  Pius  Anicetus; 
Soter  succeeded  Anicetus,  and  now,  in  the  twelfth  place  from 
the  Apostles,  Eleutherus  [174-189]  holds  the  office  of  bishop. 
In  the  same  order  and  succession  the  tradition  and  the 
preaching  of  the  truth  which  is  from  the  Apostles  have  con- 
tinued unto  us. 

Ch.  4.  But  Polycarp,  too,  was  not  only  instructed  by  the 
Apostles,  and  acquainted  with  many  that  had  seen  Christ, 
but  was  also  appointed  by  Apostles  in  Asia  bishop  of  the 
church  in  Smyrna,  whom  we,  too,  saw  in  our  early  youth 
(for  he  lived  a  long  time,  and  died,  when  a  very  old  man,  a 
glorious  and   most   illustrious   martyr's   death);   he   always 

^  See  this  passage  as  quoted  in  Eusebius,  Hisi.  Ec,  V,  6,  and  McGiffert's 
notes. 


114        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

taught  the  things  which  he  had  learned  from  the  Apostles, 
which  the  Church  also  hands  down,  and  which  alone  are 
true.  To  these  things  all  the  Asiatic  churches  testify,  as  do 
also  those  who,  down  to  the  present  time,  have  succeeded 
Polycarp,  who  was  a  much  more  trustworthy  and  certain 
witness  of  the  truth  than  Valentinus  and  Marcion  and  the 
rest  of  the  evil-minded.  It  was  he  who  was  also  in  Rome  in 
the  time  of  Anicetus  and  caused  many  to  turn  away  from  the 
above-mentioned  heretics  to  the  Church  of  God,  proclaiming 
that  he  had  received  from  the  Apostles  this  one  and  only 
truth  which  has  been  transmitted  by  the  Church.  And  there 
are  those  who  heard  from  him  that  John,  the  disciple  of  the 
Lord,  going  to  bathe  in  Ephesus,  when  he  saw  Cerinthus 
within,  ran  out  of  the  bath-house  without  bathing,  crying: 
*'Let  us  flee,  lest  even  the  bath-house  fall,  because  Cerinthus, 
the  enemy  of  the  truth,  is  within."  And  Polycarp  himself, 
when  Marcion  once  met  him  and  said,  ^'Knowest  thou  us?" 
replied,  "I  know  the  first-born  of  Satan."  Such  caution  did 
the  Apostles  and  their  disciples  exercise  that  they  might  not 
even  converse  with  any  of  those  who  perverted  the  truth; 
as  Paul,  also,  said:  ^'A  man  that  is  a  heretic  after  the  first 
and  second  admonition,  reject;  knowing  that  he  that  is  such 
subverteth  and  sinneth,  being  condemned  by  himself."  There 
is  also  a  very  powerful  Epistle  of  Polycarp  written  to  the 
Philippians,  from  which  those  who  wish  to,  and  who  are  con- 
cerned for  their  own  salvation,  may  learn  the  character  of 
his  faith  and  the  preaching  of  the  truth. 

(b)  Tertullian,  De  Prcescriptionej  20,  21.     (MSL,  2  :  38.) 

Tertullian  worked  out  in  legal  fashion  the  argument  of  Irenaeus 
from  the  testimony  of  the  bishops  in  apostolic  churches.  He  may- 
have  obtained  the  argument  from  Irenaeus,  as  he  was  evidently- 
acquainted  with  his  works.  From  Tertullian's  use  of  the  argument 
it  became  a  permanent  element  in  the  thought  of  the  West. 

Ch.  20.  The  Apostles  founded  in  the  several  cities  churches 
from  which  the  other  churches  have  henceforth  borrowed 
the  shoot  of  faith  and  seeds  of  teaching  and  do  daily  borrow 


THE  APOSTOLIC  TRADITION  115 

that  they  may  become  churches;  and  it  is  from  this  fact 
that  they  also  will  be  counted  as  apostolic,  being  the  offspring 
of  apostolic  churches.  Every  kind  of  thing  must  be  judged 
by  reference  to  its  origin.  Therefore  so  many  and  so  great 
churches  are  all  one,  being  from  that  first  Church  which  is 
from  the  Apostles.  Thus  they  are  all  primitive  and  all 
apostolic,  since  they  altogether  are  approved  by  their  unity, 
and  they  have  the  communion  of  peace,  the  title  of  brother- 
hood, and  the  interchange  of  hospitality,  and  they  are  governed 
by  no  other  rule  than  the  single  tradition  of  the  same  mystery. 

Ch.  21.  Here,  then,  we  enter  our  demurrer,  that  if  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  sent  Apostles  to  preach,  others  than  those  whom 
Christ  appointed  ought  not  to  be  received  as  preachers. 
For  no  man  knoweth  the  Father  save  the  Son  and  he  to  whom 
the  Son  has  revealed  Him  [cf.  Luke  10 :  22];  nor  does  it  appear 
that  the  Son  has  revealed  Him  unto  any  others  than  the 
Apostles,  whom  He  sent  forth  to  preach  what,  of  course.  He 
had  revealed  to  them.  Now,  what  they  should  preach,  that 
is,  what  Christ  revealed  to  them,  can,  as  I  must  likewise 
here  enter  as  a  demurrer,  properly  be  proved  in  no  other 
way  than  by  those  very  churches  which  the  Apostles  them- 
selves founded  by  preaching  to  them,  both  viva  voce,  as  the 
phrase  is,  and  subsequently  by  epistles.  If  this  is  so,  it  is 
evident  that  all  doctrine  which  agrees  with  those  apostoHc 
churches,  the  wombs  and  origins  of  the  faith,  must  be  reck- 
oned for  truth,  as  undoubtedly  containing  what  the  churches 
received  from  the  Apostles,  the  Apostles  from  Christ,  Christ 
from  God.  There  remains,  therefore,  for  us  to  show  whether 
our  doctrine,  the  rule  of  which  we  have  given  above  [v.  infra, 
§  29,  c],  agrees  with  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles,  and  likewise 
whether  the  others  come  from  deceit.  We  hold  fast  to  the 
apostoKc  churches,  because  in  none  is  there  a  different  doc- 
trine;  this  is  the  witness  of  the  truth. 

(c)  Tertullian,  De  PrcBScriptione,  36.     (MSL,  2  :  58.) 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  appeal  to  apostolic  churches  is  to  any 
and  all  such,  and  is  accordingly  just  so  much  the  stronger  in  the 


ii6        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D,  140-200 

controversy  in  which  it  was  brought  forward.  The  argument,  when- 
ever it  occurs,  does  not  turn  upon  the  infallibihty  of  any  one  see  or 
church  as  such.  That  point  is  not  touched.  Such  a  turn  to  the 
argument  would  have  weakened  the  force  of  the  appeal  in  the  dispute 
with  the  Gnostics,  however  powerfully  it  might  be  used  in  other 
controversies. 

Come,  now,  you  who  would  indulge  a  better  curiosity,  if 
you  would  apply  it  to  the  business  of  your  salvation,  run 
over  the  apostohc  churches,  in  which  the  very  thrones  of 
the  Apostles  are  still  pre-eminent  in  their  places,  in  which 
their  own  authentic  writings  are  read,  uttering  the  voice  and 
representing  the  face  of  each  of  them  severally.  Achaia  is 
very  near  you,  in  which  you  find  Corinth.  Since  you  are 
not  far  from  Macedonia,  you  have  Philippi;  there,  too, 
you  have  the  Thessalonians.  Since  you  are  able  to  cross 
to  Asia,  you  get  Ephesus.  Since,  moreover,  you  are  close 
upon  Italy,  you  have  Rome,  from  which  there  comes  even 
into  our  own  hands  the  very  authority  of  Apostles  themselves. 
How  happy  is  that  church,  on  which  Apostles  poured  forth 
all  their  doctrine  along  with  their  blood!  Where  Peter 
endures  a  passion  like  his  Lord's;  where  Paul  wins  a  crown 
in  a  death  like  John's;  where  the  Apostle  John  was  first 
plunged,  unhurt,  into  boiling  oil,  and  thence  remitted  to 
his  island  exile!  See  what  she  has  learned,  what  taught; 
what  fellowship  she  has  had  with  even  our  churches  in  Africa ! 
One  Lord  God  does  she  acknowledge,  the  Creator  of  the 
universe,  and  Christ  Jesus  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  Son 
of  God  the  Creator;  and  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh;  the 
law  and  the  prophets  she  unites  in  one  volume  with  the 
writings  of  Evangehsts  and  Apostles,  from  which  she  drinks 
in  her  faith.  This  she  seals  with  the  water  of  baptism,  arrays 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,  feeds  with  the  eucharist,  cheers  with 
martyrdom,  and  against  such  a  discipline  thus  maintained 
she  admits  no  gainsayer. 


THE   CANON  117 


§  28.    The  Canon  or  the   Authoritative   New  Testa- 
ment Writings 

The  Gnostics  used  in  support  of  their  doctrines  writings 
which  they  attributed  to  the  Apostles,  thus  having  a  direct 
apostolic  witness  to  these  doctrines.  This  they  did  in  imita- 
tion of  the  Church's  practice  of  using  apostohc  writings  for 
edification  and  instruction.  Marcion  drew  up  a  list  of  books 
which  were  alone  to  be  regarded  as  authoritative  among  his 
followers  [v.  supra,  §  23,  a].  The  point  to  be  made  by  the 
champions  of  the  faith  of  the  great  body  of  Christians  was 
that  only  those  books  could  be  legitimately  used  in  support 
of  Christian  doctrine  which  could  claim  actual  apostolic 
origin  and  had  been  used  continuously  in  the  Church.  As 
a  fact,  the  books  to  which  they  appealed  had  been  in  use 
generation  after  generation,  but  the  Gnostic  works  were 
unknown  until  a  comparatively  recent  time  and  were  too 
closely  connected  with  only  the  founders  of  a  sect  to  deserve 
credence.  It  was  a  simple  literary  argument  and  appeal  to 
tangible  evidence.  The  list  of  books  regarded  as  authoritative 
constituted  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  The  state  of  the  Canon 
in  the  second  half  of  the  second  century,  especially  in  the 
West,  is  shown  in  the  following  extracts. 

Additional  source  material:  See  Preuschen,  Analecta,  II,  Tubingen, 
1910;   Tatian,  Diatessaron,  ANF,  IX;   The  Gospel  of  Peter,  ihid. 

(a)  The  Muratorian  Fragment.  Text,  B.  F.  Westcott,  A 
General  Survey  of  the  History  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, seventh  ed.,  Cambridge,  1896.  Appendix  C;  Kirch,  n. 
134;  Preuschen,  Analecta,  II,  27.    Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  20. 

The  earliest  list  of  canonical  books  of  the  New  Testament  was 
found  by  L.  A.  Muratori  in  1740  in  a  MS.  of  the  eighth  century. 
It  lacks  beginning  and  end.  It  belongs  to  the  middle  or  the  second 
half  of  the  second  century.  It  cannot  with  certainty  be  attributed 
to  any  known  person.  The  obscure  Latin  text  is  probably  a  trans- 
lation from  the  Greek.  The  fragment  begins  with  what  appears  to 
be  an  account  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel. 


ii8        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

.  .  .  but  at  some  he  was  present,  and  so  he  set  them 
down. 

The  third  book  of  the  gospels,  that  according  to  Luke. 
Luke,  the  physician,  compiled  it  in  his  own  name  in  order, 
when,  after  the  ascension  of  Christ,  Paul  had  taken  him  to 
be  with  him  hke  a  student  of  law.  Yet  neither  did  he  see  the 
Lord  in  the  flesh;  and  he,  too,  as  he  was  able  to  ascertain 
events,  so  set  them  down.  So  he  began  his  story  from  the 
birth  of  John. 

The  fourth  of  the  gospels  is  John's,  one  of  the  disciples. 
When  exhorted  by  his  fellow-disciples  and  bishops,  he  said, 
^'Fast  with  me  this  day  for  three  days;  and  what  may  be 
revealed  to  any  of  us,  let  us  relate  to  one  another."  The 
same  night  it  was  revealed  to  Andrew,  one  of  the  Apostles, 
that  John  was  to  write  all  things  in  his  own  name,  and  they 
were  all  to  certify. 

And  therefore,  though  various  elements  are  taught  in  the 
several  books  of  the  gospels,  yet  it  makes  no  difference 
to  the  faith  of  the  believers,  since  by  one  guiding  Spirit  all 
things  are  declared  in  all  of  them  concerning  the  nativity, 
the  passion,  the  resurrection,  the  conversation  with  His 
disciples,  and  His  two  comings,  the  first  in  lowhness  and 
contempt,  which  has  come  to  pass,  the  second  glorious  with 
royal  power,  which  is  to  come. 

What  marvel,  therefore,  if  John  so  firmly  sets  forth  each 
statement  in  his  epistles,  too,  saying  of  himself:  *'What  we 
have  seen  with  our  eyes  and  heard  with  our  ears  and  our  hands 
have  handled,  these  things  we  have  written  to  you"?  For 
so  he  declares  himself  to  be  not  an  eye-witness  and  a  hearer 
only,  but  also  a  writer  of  all  the  marvels  of  the  Lord  in  order. 

The  acts,  however,  of  all  the  Apostles  are  written  in  one 
book.  Luke  puts  it  shortly,  'Ho  the  most  excellent  The- 
ophilus,"  that  the  several  things  were  done  in  his  own  pres- 
ence, as  he  also  plainly  shows  by  leaving  out  the  passion  of 
Peter,  and  also  the  departure  of  Paul  from  the  city  [i.  e., 
Rome]  on  his  journey  to  Spain. 


THE   CANON  119 

The  epistles,  however,  of  Paul  make  themselves  plain  to 
those  who  wish  to  understand  what  epistles  were  sent  by 
him,  and  from  what  place  and  for  what  cause.  He  wrote 
at  some  length,  first  of  all,  to  the  Corinthians,  forbidding 
schisms  and  heresies;  next  to  the  Galatians,  forbidding  cir- 
cumcision; then  to  the  Romans,  impressing  on  them  the 
plan  of  the  Scriptures,  and  also  that  Christ  is  the  first  prin- 
ciple of  them,  concerning  which  severally  it  is  necessary  for 
us  to  discuss,  since  the  blessed  Apostle  Paul  himself,  follow- 
ing the  order  of  his  predecessor  John,  writes  only  by  name  to 
seven  churches  in  the  following  order:  to  the  Corinthians  a 
first,  to  the  Ephesians  a  second,  to  the  Philippians  a  third, 
to  the  Colossians  a  fourth,  to  the  Galatians  a  fifth,  to  the 
Thessalonians  a  sixth,  to  the  Romans  a  seventh;  and  yet, 
although  for  the  sake  of  admonition  there  is  a  second  to  the 
Corinthians  and  to  the  Thessalonians,  but  one  Church  is 
recognized  as  being  spread  over  the  entire  world.  For  John, 
too,  in  the  Apocalypse,  though  he  writes  to  seven  churches, 
yet  speaks  to  all.  Howbeit  to  Philemon  one,  to  Titus  one, 
and  to  Timothy  two  were  put  in  writing  from  personal 
inclination  and  attachment,  to  be  in  honor,  however,  with 
the  Catholic  Church  for  the  ordering  of  the  ecclesiastical  mode 
of  hfe.  There  is  current,  also,  one  to  the  Laodiceans,  another 
to  the  Alexandrians,  [both]  forged  in  Paul's  name  to  suit  a 
heresy  of  Marcion,  and  several  others,  which  cannot  be 
received  into  the  Catholic  Church;  for  it  is  not  fitting  that 
gall  be  mixed  with  honey. 

The  Epistle  of  Jude,  no  doubt,  and  the  couple  bearing  the 
name  of  John  are  accepted  in  the  CathoHc  [Church],  and  the 
Wisdom  written  by  the  friends  of  Solomon  in  his  honor. 
The  Apocalypse,  also,  of  John  and  of  Peter  only  we  receive; 
which  some  of  us  will  not  have  read  in  the  Church.  But  the 
Shepherd  was  written  quite  lately  in  our  times  by  Hermas, 
while  his  brother  Pius,  the  bishop,  was  sitting  in  the  chair  of 
the  church  of  the  city  of  Rome;  and  therefore  it  ought  to 
be  read,  indeed,  but  it  cannot  to  the  end  of  time  be  publicly 


I20        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

read  in  the  Church  to  the  people,  either  among  the  prophets, 
who  are  complete  in  number,  or  among  the  Apostles. 

But  of  Valentinus,  the  Arsinoite,  and  his  friends,  we  re- 
ceive nothing  at  all,  who  have  also  composed  a  long  new 
book  of  Psalms,  together  with  Basilides  and  the  Asiatic 
founder  of  the  Montanists. 

(6)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcsr.,  Ill,  ii:8.     (MSG,  7:885.) 

The  following  extract  illustrates  the  allegorical  method  of  exegesis 
in  use  throughout  the  Church,  and  also  the  opinion  of  the  author 
that  there  were  but  four  gospels,  and  could  be  no  more  than  four. 
It  should  be  noted  that  the  symbolism  of  the  beasts  is  not  that  which 
has  become  current  in  ecclesiastical  art. 

It  is  not  possible  that  the  gospels  be  either  more  or  fewer 
than  they  are.  For  since  there  are  four  regions  of  the  world 
in  which  we  live,  and  four  principal  winds,  and  the  Church 
is  scattered  over  the  whole  earth,  and  the  pillar  and  ground 
of  the  Church  is  the  Gospel  and  the  Spirit  of  Life,  it  is  fitting 
that  she  should  have  four  pillars,  breathing  forth  immortahty 
on  every  side,  and  giving  Hfe  to  men.  From  this  it  is  evident 
that  the  Word,  the  Artificer  of  all,  who  sitteth  upon  the 
cherubim  and  who  contains  all  things  and  was  manifested 
to  men,  has  given  us  the  Gospel  under  four  forms,  but  bound 
together  by  one  Spirit.  As  also  David  says  when  he  prayed 
for  His  coming:  "Thou  that  sittest  between  the  cherubim, 
shine  forth"  [cf.  Psalm  80:  i].  For  the  cherubim,  also,  were 
four-faced,  and  their  faces  were  images  of  the  dispensation 
of  the  Son  of  God.  For  he  says,  "The  first  living  creature 
was  like  a  lion"  [cf.  Ezek.  i  :  5  ff.],  symbolizing  His  effectual 
working,  leadership,  and  royal  power;  the  second  was  like 
a  calf,  symbohzing  His  sacrificial  and  sacerdotal  order;  but 
"the  third  had,  as  it  were,  the  face  of  a  man,"  evidently 
describing  His  coming  as  a  human  being;  "the  fourth  was 
like  a  flying  eagle,"  pointing  out  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  hovering 
over  the  Church.  And  therefore  the  gospels  are  in  accord 
with  these  things,  among  which  Christ  is  seated.  For  that 
according  to  John  relates  His  original,  effectual,  and  glorious 


THE   CANON  121 

generation  from  the  Father,  thus  declaring,  ''In  the  beginning 
was  the  Word  and  the  Word  was  with  God  and  the  Word  was 
God"  [cf.  John  i  :  1  ff.],  and  further,  ''All  things  were  made 
by  Him  and  without  Him  was  nothing  made."  For  this  reason, 
also,  is  that  Gospel  full  of  confidence,  for  such  is  His  person. 
But  that  according  to  Luke,  which  takes  up  His  priestly  char- 
acter, commenced  with  Zacharias,  the  priest,  who  offers 
sacrifice  to  God.  For  now  was  made  ready  the  fatted  calf, 
about  to  be  immolated  for  the  recovery  of  the  younger  son 
[Luke  15  :  23].  Matthew,  again,  relates  His  generation  as  a 
man,  saying,  "The  book  of  the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
the  son  of  David,  the  son  of  Abraham"  [Matt.  1:1];  and 
"The  birth  of  Jesus  Christ  was  on  this  wise"  [Matt,  i  :  18]. 
This,  then,  is  the  gospel  of  His  humanity;  for  which  reason 
the  character  of  a  humble  and  meek  man  is  kept  up  through 
the  whole  gospel.  Mark,  on  the  other  hand,  commences 
with  reference  to  the  prophetical  Spirit  who  comes  down 
from  on  high  to  men,  saying,  "The  beginning  of  the  Gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ,  as  it  is  written  in  Isaiah  the  prophet,"  point- 
ing to  the  winged  aspect  of  the  Gospel,  and  on  this  account  he 
makes  a  compendious  and  brief  narrative,  for  such  is  the 
prophetical  character.  And  the  Word  of  God  himself  had 
intercourse  with  the  patriarchs,  before  Moses,  in  accordance 
with  His  divinity  and  glory;  but  for  those  under  the  Law  He 
instituted  a  sacerdotal  and  Hturgical  service.  Afterward, 
having  been  made  man  for  us,  He  sent  the  gift  of  the  heavenly 
Spirit  over  all  the  earth,  to  protect  it  with  His  wings.  Such, 
then,  was  the  course  followed  by  the  Son  of  God,  and  such, 
also,  were  the  forms  of  the  living  creatures;  and  such  as  was 
the  form  of  the  living  creatures,  such,  also,  was  the  char- 
acter of  the  Gospel.  For  the  living  creatures  are  quadriform, 
and  the  Gospel  is  quadriform,  as  is  also  the  course  followed 
by  our  Lord.  For  this  reason  four  principal  covenants  were 
given  mankind:  one  prior  to  the  Deluge,  under  Adam;  the 
second  after  the  Deluge,  under  Noah;  the  third  was  the 
giving  of  the  law  under  Moses;    the  fourth  is   that  which 


122        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

renovates  man  and  sums  up  all  things  in  itself  by  means  of 
the  Gospel,  raising  and  bearing  men  upon  its  wings  into  the 
heavenly  kingdom. 

(c)  Tertullian,  Adv.  Marcion.,  IV,  5.     (MSL,  2:395.) 

Tertullian's  work  against  Marcion  belongs  to  the  first  decade  of 
the  third  century;  see  above,  §  23,  5.  In  the  following  passage  he  com- 
bines the  argument  from  the  apostohc  churches  with  the  authority 
of  the  apostolic  witness.  This  is  the  special  importance  of  the  refer- 
ence to  the  connection  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel  with  St.  Peter,  and  is 
an  application  of  the  principle  that  the  authority  of  a  book  in  the 
Church  rested  upon  its  apostolic  origin. 

If  it  is  evidently  true  that  what  is  earlier  is  more  true, 
that  what  is  earher  is  what  is  from  the  beginning,  that  what 
is 'from  the  beginning  is  from  the  Apostles,  it  will  be  equally 
evidently  true  that  what  is  handed  down  from  the  Apostles 
is  what  has  been  a  sacred  deposit  in  the  churches  of  the 
Apostles.  Let  us  see  what  milk  the  Corinthians  drank  from 
Paul;  to  what  rule  the  Galatians  were  brought  for  correc- 
tion; what  the  Philippians,  the  Thessalonians,  the  Ephesians, 
read;  what  the  Romans  near  by  also  say,  to  whom  Peter  and 
Paul  bequeathed  the  Gospel  even  sealed  with  their  own 
blood.  We  have  also  John's  nurshng  churches.  For,  al- 
though Marcion  rejects  his  Apocalypse,  the  order  of  bishops, 
when  traced  to  their  origin,  will  rest  on  John  as  their  author. 
Likewise  the  noble  lineage  of  the  other  churches  is  recognized. 
I  say,  therefore,  that  in  them,  and  not  only  in  the  apostolic 
churches,  but  in  all  those  which  are  united  with  them  in 
the  fellowship  of  the  mystery  [sacramenti],  that  Gospel  of 
Luke,  which  we  are  defending  with  all  our  might  [cf.  §  23], 
has  stood  its  ground  from  its  very  first  pubHcation;  whereas 
Marcion's  gospel  is  not  known  to  most  people,  and  to  none 
whatever  is  it  known  without  being  condemned.  Of  course 
it  has  its  churches,  but  they  are  its  own;  they  are  as  late  as 
they  are  spurious.  Should  you  want  to  know  their  origins, 
you  will  more  easily  discover  apostasy  in  it  than  apostolicity, 
with  Marcion,  forsooth,  as  their  founder  or  some  one  of 


THE  APOSTLES'   CREED  123 

Marcion's  swarm.  Even  wasps  make  combs;  so,  also,  these 
Marcionites  make  churches.  The  same  authority  of  the 
apostoKc  churches  will  afford  evidence  to  other  gospels,  also, 
which  we  possess  equally  through  their  means  and  according 
to  their  usage — I  mean  the  Gospel  of  John  and  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew,  but  that  which  Mark  published  may  be  affirmed 
to  be  Peter's,  whose  interpreter  Mark  was.  For  even  the 
Digest  of  Luke  men  usually  ascribe  to  Paul.  And  it  may 
well  seem  that  the  works  which  disciples  publish  belong  to 
their  masters. 

§  29.    The  Apostles'  Creed 

By  the  middle  of  the  second  century  there  were  current  in 
the  Church  brief  confessions  of  faith  which  had  already 
been  in  use  from  a  time  in  the  remoter  past  as  summaries 
of  the  apostolic  faith.  They  were  naturally  attributed  to  the 
Apostles  themselves,  although  they  seem  to  have  varied  in 
many  details.  They  were  used  principally  in  baptism,  and 
were  long  kept  secret  from  the  catechumen  until  just  before 
that  rite  was  administered.  They  are  preserved  only  in  para- 
phrase, and  can  be  reconstructed  only  by  a  careful  com- 
parison of  many  texts. 

Additional  source  material:  See  Hahn,  Bibliothek  der  Symhole  und 
Glauhensregeln  der  alien  Kirche,  third  ed.,  Breslau,  1897;  cf.  Mirbt, 
n.  16,  16  a. 

{a)  Irenaeus,  Adv,  Ecby,,  I,  10.    (MSG,  7  :  549/.) 

For  Irenaeus,  v.  supra,  §  3,  a. 

The  Church,  though  dispersed  through  the  whole  world  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth,  has  received  from  the  Apostles  and 
their  disciples  the  faith:  In  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 
who  made  the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  the  seas,  and  all 
that  in  them  is;  And  in  one  Christ  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God, 
who  was  incarnate  for  our  salvation ;  And  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 
who   through   the  prophets  preached  the  dispensations  and 


124        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

the  advents,  and  the  birth  from  the  Virgin,  and 'the  passion, 
and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  the  bodily  assump- 
tion into  the  heavens  of  the  beloved  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord, 
and  His  appearing  from  the  heavens  in  the  glory  of  the  Father, 
in  order  to  sum  up  all  things  under  one  head  [cf.  Ephes.  i  :  lo], 
and  to  raise  up  all  flesh  of  all  mankind,  that  to  Christ  Jesus, 
our  Lord  and  God  and  Saviour  and  King,  every  knee  of  those 
that  are  in  heaven  and  on  earth  and  under  the  earth  should 
bow  [cf.  Phil.  2:11],  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  the 
Father  invisible,  and  that  every  tongue  should  confess  Him, 
and  that  He  may  execute  righteous  judgment  on  all;  sending 
into  eternal  fire  the  spiritual  powers  of  wickedness  and  the 
angels  who  transgressed  and  apostatized,  and  the  godless 
and  unrighteous  and  lawless  and  blasphemous  among  men, 
but  granting  Hfe  and  immortaHty  and  eternal  glory  to  the 
righteous  and  holy,  who  have  both  kept  the  commandments 
and  continued  in  His  love,  some  from  the  beginning,  some 
from  their  conversion. 

(b)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  Ill,  4.     (MSG,  7  :  855.) 

The  following  form  of  the  creed  more  closely  resembles  the  tradi- 
tional Apostles'  Creed.  With  it  compare  the  paraphrase  in  Irenaeus, 
op.  cit.,  IV,  33  :  7. 

If  the  Apostles  had  not  left  us  the  Scriptures,  would  it 
not  be  necessary  to  follow  the  order  of  tradition  which  they 
handed  down  to  those  to  whom  they  committed  the  churches? 
To  this  order  many  nations  of  the  barbarians  gave  assent,  of 
those  who  believe  in  Christ,  having  salvation  written  in  their 
hearts  by  the  Spirit  without  paper  and  ink,  and  guarding 
diligently  the  ancient  tradition:  Believing  in  one  God, 
Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  all  that  is  in  them;  through 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  who,  because  of  His  astounding 
love  toward  His  creatures,  sustained  the  birth  of  the  Virgin, 
Himself  uniting  man  to  God,  and  suffered  under  Pontius 
Pilate,  and  rising  again  was  received  in  brightness,  and  shall 
come  again  in  glory  as  the  Saviour  of  those  who  are  saved 


THE  APOSTLES'   CREED  125 

and  the  judge  of  those  who  are  judged,  and  sending  into 
eternal  fire  the  perverters  of  the  truth  and  despisers  of  His 
Father  and  His  coming. 

(c)  TertulHan,  De  Virginibus  Velandis,  i.     (MSL,  2  :  937). 

Tertullian  gives  various  paraphrases  of  the  creed.  The  three  most 
important  are  the  following  and  d,  e.  The  date  of  the  work  De  Virgi- 
nibus Velandis  is  about  211,  and  belongs  to  his  Montanist  period. 

The  Rule  of  Faith  is  altogether  one,  sole,  immovable,  and 
irreformable — namely,  of  beheving  in  one  God  the  Almighty, 
the  Maker  of  the  world;  and  His  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  born  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  on  the  third  day 
raised  again  from  the  dead,  received  in  the  heavens,  sitting  now 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  coming  to  judge  the  quick 
and  the  dead,  also  through  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh. ^ 

{d)  Tertullian,  Adv.  Praxean,  2.     (MSL,  2  :  156.) 

The  work  of  Tertullian  against  Praxeas  is  one  of  his  latest  works, 
and  is  especially  important  as  developing  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
as  opposed  to  the  Patripassianism  of  Praxeas.  To  this  theory  of 
Praxeas,  Tertullian  refers  in  the  opening  sentence  of  the  following 
extract,  quoting  the  position  of  Praxeas.    See  below,  §  40,  b. 

''Therefore  after  a  time  the  Father  was  born,  and  the 
Father  suffered.  He  himself  God,  the  omnipotent  Lord,  Jesus 
Christ  was  preached."  But  as  for  us  always,  and  now  more, 
as  better  instructed  by  the  Paraclete,  the  Leader  into  all 
truth:  We  beHeve  one  God;  but  under  this  dispensation 
which  we  call  the  economy  there  is  the  Son  of  the  only  God, 
his  Word  [Sermo]  who  proceeded  from  Him,  through  whom 
all  things  were  made,  and  without  whom  nothing  was  made. 
This  One  was  sent  by  the  Father  into  the  Virgin,  and  was 
born  of  her,  Man  and  God,  the  Son  of  Man  and  the  Son  of 
God,  and  called  Jesus  Christ;  He  suffered.  He  died  and  was 
buried,  according  to  the  Scriptures;   and  raised  again  by  the 

1  By  a  slight  change  in  the  order  of  the  words,  as  suggested  by  Neander,  the 
last  two  clauses  might  read  more  clearly:  "To  judge  the  quick  and  also  the 
dead  through  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh." 


126        THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

Father,  and  taken  up  into  the  heavens,  and  He  sits  at  the 
right  hand  of  the  Father;  He  shall  come  again  to  judge  the 
quick  and  the  dead:  and  He  thence  did  send,  according  to 
His  promise,  from  the  Father,  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Paraclete, 
the  Sanctifier  of  the  faith  of  those  who  beheve  in  the  Father 
and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  That  this  rule  has  come 
down  from  the  beginning,  even  before  any  of  the  earlier 
heresies,  much  more  before  Praxeas,  who  is  of  yesterday, 
the  lateness  of  date  of  all  heresies  proves,  as  also  the  nov- 
elties of  Praxeas,  a  pretender  of  yesterday. 

{e)  TertuUian,  De  Prcescriptione,  13.    (MSL,  2  :  30.) 

The  Rule  of  Faith  is  .  .  .  namely,  that  by  which  it  is 
believed:  That  there  is  only  one  God,  and  no  other  besides 
the  Maker  of  the  world,  who  produced  the  universe  out  of 
nothing,  through  His  Word  [Verbum],  sent  forth  first  of  all; 
that  this  Word,  called  His  Son,  was  seen  in  the  name  of  God 
in  various  ways  by  the  patriarchs,  and  always  heard  in  the 
prophets,  at  last  was  sent  down  from  the  Spirit  and  power 
of  God  the  Father,  into  the  Virgin  Mary,  was  made  flesh  in 
her  womb,  and  born  of  her,  lived  as  Jesus  Christ;  that  there- 
upon He  preached  the  new  law  and  the  new  promise  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  heavens;  wrought  miracles;  was  fastened  to 
the  cross;  rose  again  the  third  day;  was  caught  up  into  the 
heavens;  and  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father;  He 
sent  in  His  place  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  lead  the 
believers;  He  will  come  again  with  glory  to  take  the  saints 
into  the  enjoyment  of  eternal  life  and  the  celestial  promises, 
and  to  judge  the  wicked  with  perpetual  fire,  with  the  restora- 
tion of  the  flesh. 

§  30.    Later  Gnosticism 

Though  Gnosticism  was  expelled  from  the  Church  as  it 
perfected  its  organization  and  institutions  on  the  basis  of 
the  episcopate,  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  and  the  creeds, 
outside  the  CathoHc  Church,  or  the  Church  as  thus  organized, 


LATER  GNOSTICISM  127 

Gnosticism  existed  for  centuries,  though  rapidly  declining  in 
the  third  century.  The  strength  of  the  movement  was  still 
further  diminished  by  loss  of  many  adherents  to  Manichaean- 
ism  {v.  §  54),  which  had  much  in  common  with  Gnosticism. 
The  persistence  of  these  sects,  together  with  various  later 
heresies,  in  spite  of  the  very  stringent  laws  of  the  Empire 
against  them  (v.  §  73)  should  prevent  any  hasty  conclusions 
as  to  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  the  absence  of  sects  in  the 
patristic  age.  Unity  can  be  found  only  by  overlooking  those 
outside  the  unity  of  the  largest  body  of  Christians,  and  agree- 
ment by  ignoring  those  who  differed  from  it. 

Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  Epistulce  81,  145.     (MSG,  83  :  1259, 

1383.) 

Ep.  81  was  written  to  the  Consul  Nonus,  A.  D.  445.  Ep.  145  was 
written  to  the  monks  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  450. 

Ep.  81.  To  every  one  else  every  city  lies  open,  and  that 
not  only  to  the  followers  of  Arius  and  Eunomius,  but  to 
Manichaeans  and  Marcionites,  and  to  those  suffering  from  the 
disease  of  Valentinus  and  Montanus,  yes,  and  even  to  pagans 
and  Jews;  but  I,  the  foremost  champion  of  the  teaching  of 
the  Gospel,  am  excluded  from  every  city.  ...  I  led  eight 
villages  of  Marcionites  with  their  surrounding  country  into 
the  way  of  truth,  another  full  of  Eunomians  and  another 
of  Arians  I  brought  to  the  Hght  of  divine  knowledge,  and,  by 
God's  grace,  not  a  tare  of  heresy  was  left  among  us. 

Ep.  145.  I  do  indeed  sorrow  and  lament  that  I  am  com- 
pelled by  the  attacks  of  fever  to  adduce  against  men,  sup- 
posed to  be  of  one  and  the  same  faith  with  myself,  the  argu- 
ments which  I  have  already  urged  against  the  victims  of  the 
plague  of  Marcion,  of  whom,  by  God's  grace,  I  have  con- 
verted more  than  ten  thousand  and  brought  them  to  holy 
baptism. 


128        THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

§  31.    The  Results  of  the  Crisis 

The  internal  crisis,  or  the  conflict  with  heresy,  led  the 
Church  to  perfect  its  organization,  and,  as  a  result,  the 
foundation  was  laid  for  such  a  development  of  the  episcopate 
that  the  Church  was  recognized  as  based  upon  an  order  of 
bishops  receiving  their  powers  in  succession  from  the  Apos- 
tles. Just  what  those  powers  were  and  how  they  were  trans- 
mitted were  matters  left  to  a  later  age  to  determine.  (F.  infra j 
§§  50,  5I-) 

{a)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  IV,  26  :  2,  5.     (MSG,  7  :  1053.) 

That  Irenaeus,  writing  about  175,  could  appeal  to  the  episcopal 
succession  as  commonly  recognized  and  admitted,  and  to  use  it  as  a 
basis  of  unity  for  the  Church,  is  generally  regarded  as  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  a  wide-spread  episcopal  organization  at  an  early  date  in 
the  second  century.  Possibly  the  connection  of  Irenaeus  with  Asia 
Minor,  where  the  episcopal  organization  admittedly  was  earliest, 
diminishes  the  force  of  the  argument.  The  reference  to  the  "charisma 
of  truth,"  which  the  bishops  were  said  to  possess,  was  to  furnish  later 
a  theoretical  basis  for  the  authority  of  bishops  assembled  in  council. 

Ch.  2.  Wherefore  it  is  incumbent  to  obey  the  presbyters 
who  are  in  the  Church,  those  who,  as  I  have  shown,  possess 
the  succession  from  the  Apostles;  those  who  together  with 
the  succession  of  the  episcopate  have  received  the  certain 
gift  [charisma]  of  the  truth  according  to  the  good  pleasure 
of  the  Father;  but  also  to  hold  in  suspicion  others  who 
depart  from  the  primitive  succession  and  assemble  themselves 
together  in  any  place  whatsoever.  .  .  . 

Ch.  5.  Such  presbyters  does  the  Church  nourish,  of  whom 
also  the  prophet  says:  ''I  will  give  thy  rulers  in  peace,  and 
thy  bishops  in  righteousness"  [cj.  Is.  60  :  17].  Of  whom 
also  the  Lord  did  declare:  "Who,  then,  shall  be  a  faithful 
steward,  good  and  wise,  whom  the  Lord  sets  over  His  house- 
hold, to  give  them  their  meat  in  due  season?  Blessed  is  that 
servant  whom  his  Lord  when  he  cometh  shall  find  so  doing" 
[Matt.  24  :  45  /.].     Paul,  then,  teaching  us  where  one  may 


THE  RESULTS  OF  THE   CRISIS  129 

find  such,  says:  ''God  hath  placed  in  the  Church,  first,  Apos- 
tles; secondly,  prophets;  thirdly,  teachers"  [I  Cor.  12  :  28]. 
Where,  then,  the  gifts  of  the  Lord  have  been  placed  there  we 
are  to  learn  the  truth;  namely,  from  those  who  possess  the 
succession  of  the  Church  from  the  Apostles,  and  among 
whom  exists  that  which  is  sound  and  blameless  in  conduct,  as 
well  as  that  which  is  unadulterated  and  incorrupt  in  speech. 

(b)  TertulHan,  De  Prcescriptione,  32.     (MSL,  2  :  52.) 

In  Tertullian's  statement  as  to  the  necessity  of  apostolic  succession,  | 
the  language  is  more  precise  than  in  Irenaeus's.    Bishop  and  presbyter  ' 
are  not  used  as  interchangeable  terms,  as  would  appear  in  the  passage 
in  Irenaeus.    The  whole  is  given  a  more  legal  turn,  as  was  in  harmony 
with  the  writer's  legal  mind. 

But  if  there  be  any  heresies  bold  enough  to  plant  them- 
selves in  the  midst  of  the  apostolic  age,  that  they  may  thereby 
seem  to  have  been  handed  down  from  the  Apostles,  because 
they  were  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  we  can  say:  Let  them 
produce  the  originals  of  their  churches;  let  them  unfold  the 
roll  of  their  bishops,  running  down  in  due  succession  from 
the  beginning  in  such  manner  that  that  first  bishop  of  theirs 
shall  be  able  to  show  for  his  ordainer  or  predecessor  some  one 
of  the  Apostles  or  of  apostolic  men — a  man,  moreover,  who 
continued  steadfast  with  the  Apostles.  For  in  this  manner 
the  apostolic  churches  transmit  their  registers;  as  the  church 
of  Smyrna,  which  records  that  Polycarp  was  placed  therein 
by  John;  as  also  the  church  of  Rome,  which  makes  Clement 
to  have  been  ordained  in  like  manner  by  Peter.  In  exactly 
the  same  way  the  other  churches  likewise  exhibit  their  sev- 
eral worthies,  whom,  as  having  been  appointed  to  their  epis- 
copal places  by  the  Apostles,  they  regard  as  transmitters  of 
the  apostolic  seed. 

CHAPTER  IV.  THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  CATHOLIC  THEOLOGY 

The  theology  of  the  Church,  as  distinguished  from  the 
current  traditional  theology,  was  the  statement  of  the  beliefs 
commonly  held  by  Christians  but  expressed  in    the   more 


I30       THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

precise  and  scientific  language  of  current  philosophy,  the 
co-ordination  of  those  beliefs  as  so  stated  together  with  their 
necessary  consequences,  and  their  proof  by  reference  to 
Holy  Scripture  and  reason.  In  this  attempt  to  build  up  a 
body  of  reasoned  religious  ideas  there  were  two  lines  of 
thought  or  interpretation  of  the  common  Christianity  already 
distinguished  by  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  des- 
tined to  hold  a  permanent  place  in  the  Church.  These  were 
the  apologetic  conception  of  Christianity  as  primarily  a 
revealed  philosophy  (§32),  and  the  so-called  Asia  Minor 
school  of  theology,  with  its  conception  of  Christianity  as 
primarily  salvation  from  sin  and  corruptibiHty  (§33).  In 
both  lines  of  interpretation  the  Incarnation  played  an  essen- 
tial part:  in  the  apologetic  as  insuring  the  truth  of  the  re- 
vealed philosophy,  in  the  Asia  Minor  theology  as  imparting 
to  corruptible  man  the  divine  incorruptibihty. 

§  32.   The  Apologetic  Conception  of  Christianity. 
§  33.   The  Asia  Minor  Conception  of  Christianity. 

§  32.    The  Apologetic  Conception  of  Christianity 

Christianity  was  regarded  as  a  revealed  philosophy  by 
the  apologists.  This  they  considered  under  three  principal 
aspects:  knowledge,  or  a  revelation  of  the  divine  nature; 
a  new  law,  or  a  code  of  morals  given  by  Christ;  and  life, 
or  future  rewards  for  the  observance  of  the  new  law  that 
had  been  given.  The  foundation  of  all  was  laid  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Logos  (A),  which  involved,  as  a  consequence, 
some  theory  of  the  relation  of  the  resulting  distinctions  in 
the  divine  nature  to  the  primary  conviction  of  the  unity  of 
God,  or  some  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (B).  As  a  result  of  the 
new  law  given,  moralism  was  inevitable,  whereby  a  man  by 
his  efforts  earned  everlasting  life  (C).  The  proof  that  Jesus 
was  the  incarnate  Logos  was  drawn  from  the  fulfilment  of 
Hebrew  prophecy  (D).  It  should  be  remembered  that  the 
apologists  influenced  later  theology  by  their  actual  writings, 


APOLOGETIC  CONCEPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY    131 

and  not  by  unexpressed  and  undeveloped  opinions  which  they 
held  as  a  part  of  the  common  tradition  and  the  Christianity 
of  the  Gentile  Church.  Whatever  they  might  have  held  in 
addition  to  their  primary  contentions  had  little  or  no  effect, 
however  valuable  it  may  be  for  modern  students,  and  the 
conviction  that  Christianity  was  essentially  a  revealed  phi- 
losophy became  current,  especially  in  the  East,  finding  its 
most  powerful  expression  in  the  Alexandrian  school.    (F.  infra, 

§43-) 

(A)     The  Logos  Doctrine 

As  stated  by  the  apologists,  the  Logos  doctrine  not  only 
furnished  a  valuable  Hne  of  defence  for  Christianity  (v.  supra, 
§  20),  but  also  gave  theologians  a  useful  formula  for  stating 
the  relation  of  the  divine  element  in  Christ  to  God.  That 
divine  element  was  the  Divine  Word  or  Reason  (Logos). 
It  is  characteristic  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos  as  held  by  the 
early  apologists  that,  although  they  make  the  Word,  or 
Logos,  personal  and  distinguish  Him  from  God  the  Father, 
yet  that  Word  does  not  become  personally  distinguished 
from  the  source  of  His  being  until,  and  in  connection  with, , 
the  creation  of  the  world.  Hence  there  arose  the  distinction 
between  the  Logos  endiathetos,  or  as  yet  within  the  being  of  the 
Father,  and  the  Logos  prophorikos,  or  as  proceeding  forth 
and  becoming  a  distinct  person.  Here  is,  at  any  rate,  a 
marked  advance  upon  the  speculation  of  Philo,  by  whom  the 
Logos  is  not  regarded  as  distinctly  personal. 

(a)  Justin  Martyr,  ApoL,  I,  46.    (MSG,  6  :  398.) 

In  addition  to  the  following  passage  from  Justin  Martyr,  see  above, 
§  20,  for  a  longer  statement  to  much  the  same  effect. 

We  have  been  taught  that  Christ  is  the  first-born  of  God, 
and  we  have  declared  above  that  He  is  the  Word  of  whom 
every  race  of  men  were  partakers;  and  those  who  lived  reason- 
ably are  Christians  even  though  they  have  been  thought 
atheists;  as  among  the  Greeks,  Socrates  and  Herachtus,  and 


132       THE  CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

men  like  them;  and  among  the  barbarians,  Abraham  and 
Ananias,  Azarias,  and  Missael  [the  ''three  holy  children," 
companions  of  Daniel,  see  LXX,  Dan.  3  :  23  /.],  and  EHas 
[i.  e.,  Elijah],  and  many  others  whose  actions  and  names  we 
now  decline  to  recount  because  we  know  that  it  would  be 
tedious. 

(b)  Theophilus,  Ad  Autolycum,  II,  10,  22.     (MSG,  6:398.) 

Theophilus  was  the  sixth  bishop  of  Antioch,  from  169  until  after 
180.  His  apology,  consisting  of  three  books  addressed  to  an  otherwise 
unknown  Autolycus,  has  alone  been  preserved  of  his  works.  Frag- 
ments attributed  to  him  are  of  very  doubtful  authenticity.  The 
date  of  the  third  book  must  be  subsequent  to  the  death  of  Marcus 
AureHus,  March  17,  180,  which  is  mentioned.  The  first  and  second 
books  may  be  somewhat  earlier.  The  distinction  made  in  the  follow- 
ing between  the  Logos  endiathetos  and  the  Logos  prophorikos  was 
subsequently  dropped  by  theologians. 

Ch.  10.  God,  then,  having  His  own  Logos  internal  [endia- 
theton]  within  His  own  bowels,  begat  Him,  emitting  Him 
along  with  His  own  wisdom  before  all  things. 

Ch.  22.  What  else  is  this  voice  but  the  Word  of  God, 
who  is  also  His  Son?  Not  as  the  poets  and  writers  of  myths 
talk  of  the  sons  of  the  gods  begotten  from  intercourse  with 
women,  but  as  the  Truth  expounds,  the  Word  that  always 
exists,  residing  within  [endiatheton]  the  heart  of  God.  For 
before  anything  came  into  existence  He  had  Him  for  His 
counsellor,  being  His  own  mind  and  thought.  But  when 
God  wished  to  make  all  that  He  had  determined  on.  He 
begat  this  Word  proceeding  forth  [prophorikon],  the  first-born 
of  all  creation,  not  being  Himself  emptied  of  the  Word  [i.  e., 
being  without  reason],  but  having  begotten  Reason  and 
always  conversing  with  His  reason. 

(B)     The  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity 

The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  followed  naturally  from  the 
doctrine  of  the  Logos.  The  fuller  discussion  belongs  to  the 
Monarchian  controversies.     It  is  considered  here  as  a  posi- 


APOLOGETIC  CONCEPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY    133 

tion  resulting  from  the  general  position  taken  by  the  apol- 
ogists.   (F.  infra,  §  40.) 

{a)  Theophilus,  Ad  Autolycum,  II,  15.     (MSG,  6  :  1078.) 

The  following  passage  is  probably  the  earliest  in  which  the  word 
Trinity,  or  Trias,  is  applied  to  the  relation  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost.  It  is  usual  in  Greek  theology  to  use  the  word  Trias  as  equiv- 
alent to  the  Latin  term  Trinity.  Cf.  Tertullian,  Adv.  Praxean,  2,  for 
first  use  of  the  term  Trinity  in  Latin  theology. 

In  like  manner,  also,  the  three  days,  which  were  before  the 
luminaries^  are  types  of  the  Trinity  (Trias)  of  God,  and  His 
Word,  and  His  Wisdom. 

(b)  Athenagoras,  Supplicatio,  10,  12.     (MSG,  6:910,  914.) 

Athenagoras,  one  of  the  ablest  of  the  apologists,  was,  like  Justin 
Martyr  and  several  others,  a  philosopher  before  he  became  a  Christian. 
His  apology,  known  as  Supplicatio,  or  Legatio  pro  Christianis,  is  his 
most  important  work.  Its  date  is  probably  177,  as  it  is  addressed  to 
the  Emperors  Marcus  Aurelius  and  Commodus. 

Ch.  10.  If  it  occurs  to  you  to  inquire  what  is  meant  by 
the  Son,  I  wiU  briefly  state  that  He  is  the  first  product  of  the 
Father,  not  as  having  been  brought  into  existence  (for  from 
the  beginning  God,  who  is  the  eternal  mind  [Nous],  had  the 
Logos  in  Himself,  being  eternally  reasonable  [XoyLKo^;])  ^  but  in- 
asmuch as  He  came  forth  to  be  idea  and  energizing  power  of 
all  material  things,  which  lay  like  a  nature  without  attributes, 
and  an  inactive  earth,  the  grosser  particles  being  mixed  up 
with  the  lighter.  The  prophetic  Spirit  also  agrees  with  our 
statements:  "The  Lord,  it  says,  created  me  the  beginning  of 
His  ways  to  His  works."  The  Holy  Spirit  himself,  also,  which 
operates  in  the  prophets  we  say  is  an  effluence  of  God,  flowing 
from  Him  and  returning  back  again  as  a  beam  of  the  sun. 

Ch.  12.  Are,  then,  those  who  consider  life  to  be  this,  ''Let 
us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die"  [cf.  1  Cor.  15  :  32], 
and  who  regard  death  as  a  deep  sleep  and  forgetfulness 
[cf.  Hom.,  Iliad,  XVI,  672],  to  be  regarded  as  living  piously? 

^  Reference  to  the  creation  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  on  the  fourth  day 
of  creation. 


134       THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

But  men  who  reckon  the  present  life  as  of  very  small  worth 
indeed,  and  are  led  by  this  one  thing  along — that  they  know 
God  and  with  Him  His  Logos,  what  is  the  oneness  of  the  Son 
with  the  Father,  what  the  communion  of  the  Father  with 
the  Son,  what  is  the  Spirit,  and  what  is  the  unity  of  these  and 
their  distinction,  the  Spirit,  the  Son,  and  the  Father — and  who 
know  that  the  Hfe  for  which  we  look  is  far  better  than  can  be 
described  in  word,  provided  we  arrive  at  it  pure  from  all 
wrong-doing,  and  who,  moreover,  carry  our  benevolence  to 
such  an  extent  that  we  not  only  love  our  friends  .  .  .  shall 
we,  I  say,  when  such  we  are  and  when  we  thus  live  that  we 
may  escape  condemnation,  not  be  regarded  as  living  piously? 

(C)     Moralistic  Christianity 

The  moralistic  conception  of  Christianity,  i.  e.,  the  view  of  Chris- 
tianity as  primarily  a  moral  code  by  the  observance  of  which  eternal 
life  was  won,  remained  fixed  in  Christian  thought  along  with  the 
philosophical  conception  of  the  faith  as  formulated  by  the  apologists. 
This  moralism  was  the  opposite  pole  to  the  conceptions  of  the  Asia 
Minor  school,  the  Augustinian  theology,  and  the  whole  mystical  con- 
ception of  Christianity. 

For  additional  source  material,  see  above,  §  i6. 

Theophilus,  Ad  Autolycum,  II,  27.     (MSG,  6  :  27.) 

God  made  man  free  and  with  power  over  himself.  That 
[death],  man  brought  upon  himself  through  carelessness  and 
disobedience,  this  [life],  God  vouchsafes  to  him  as  a  gift 
through  His  own  love  for  man  and  pity  when  men  obey  Him. 
For  as  man,  disobeying,  drew  death  upon  himself,  so,  obey- 
ing the  will  of  God,  he  who  desires  is  able  to  procure  for 
himself  everlasting  life.  For  God  has  given  us  a  law  and 
holy  commandments;  and  every  one  who  keeps  these  can 
be  saved,  and  obtaining  the  resurrection,  can  inherit  incor- 
ruption. 

(D)     Argument  from  Hebrew  Prophecy 

The  appeal  to  the  fulfilment  of  Hebrew  prophecy  was  the 
main  argument  of  the  apologists  for  the  divine  character  of 


ASIA  MINOR  CONCEPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY     135 

the  mission  of  Christ.  The  exegesis  of  the  prophetic  writings 
was  in  the  spirit  of  the  times.  Hebrew  prophecy  was  also 
regarded  as  the  source  of  all  knowledge  of  God  outside  of 
Israel.  The  theory  that  the,  Greeks  and  other  nations  bor- 
rowed was  employed  to  show  the  connection;  in  this  the 
apologists  followed  Philo  Judaeus.  No  attempt  was  made 
either  by  them  or  by  Clement  of  Alexandria  to  remove  the 
inconsistency  of  this  theory  of  borrowing  with  the  doctrine 
of  the  Logos;  see  above,  under  ''Logos  Doctrine";  also 
§  20. 

Justin  Martyr,  Apol.,  I,  30,  44.     (MSG,  6  :  374,  394.) 

Additional  source  material:  Justin  Martyr,  Dial.  c.  Try  ph. ,  pas- 
sim. 

Ch.  30.  But  lest  any  one  should  say  in  opposition  to  us: 
What  should  prevent  that  He  whom  we  call  Christ,  being  a 
man  born  of  men,  performed  what  we  call  His  mighty  works 
by  magical  art,  and  by  this  appeared  to  be  the  Son  of  God? 
We  will  offer  proof,  not  trusting  to  mere  assertions,  but  being 
of  necessity  persuaded  by  those  who  prophesied  of  Him 
before  these  things  came  to  pass. 

Ch.  44.  Whatever  both  philosophers  and  poets  have  said 
concerning  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  or  punishments  after 
death,  or  contemplation  of  things  heavenly,  or  doctrines  of 
the  like  kind,  they  have  received  such  suggestions  from  the 
prophets  as  have  enabled  them  to  understand  and  interpret 
these  things.  And  hence  there  seem  to  be  seeds  of  truth 
among  all  men. 

§33.    The  Asia  Minor  Conception  of  Christianity 

The  Asia  Minor  school  regarded  Christianity  primarily 
as  redemption,  salvation,  the  imparting  of  new  power,  Hfe, 
and  incorruptibihty  by  union  with  divinity  in  the  Incarnation. 
Its  leading  representative  was  Irenasus,  a  native  of  Asia 
Minor,  but  many  of  his  leading  ideas  had  been  anticipated 
by  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  and  they  were  shared  by  many  others. 


136       THE   CRITICAL   PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

The  theology  of  Irenaeus  influenced  Tertullian  to  some  ex- 
tent, but  its  essential  points  were  reproduced  by  Athana- 
sius,  who  was  directly  indebted  to  Irenaeus,  and  through 
him  it  superseded  in  the  Neo-Alexandrian  school  the  tradi- 
tion derived  through  Origen  and  Clement  from  the  apol- 
ogists. Characteristic  features  of  the  Asia  Minor  theology 
are  the  place  assigned  to  the  Incarnation  as  itself  effecting 
redemption  or  salvation,  the  idea  of  recapitulation  whereby 
Christ  becomes  the  head  of  a  new  race  of  redeemed  men,  a 
second  Adam,  and  of  the  eucharist  as  imparting  the  incorrup- 
tibihty  of  Christ's  immortal  fl^sh  which  is  received  by  the 
faithful. 

(a)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  V,  i.    (MSG,  7  :  1119.) 

The  position  of  the  Incarnation  in  the  system  and  its  relation  to 
redemption. 

In  no  other  way  could  we  have  learned  the  things  of  God, 
if  our  Master,  existing  previously  as  the  Word,  had  not  been 
made  man.  For  no  one  else  could  have  declared  to  us  the 
truths  of  the  Father  than  the  Father's  own  Word.  For 
who  else  knew  the  mind  of  the  Lord  or  who  else  has  been 
his  counsellor?  [Rom.  11  :  34].  Nor  again  in  any  other  way 
could  we  have  learned  except  by  seeing  our  Master  with  our 
eyes  and  hearing  His  voice  with  our  ears;  that  so  as  imitators 
of  His  acts  and  doers  of  His  words  we  might  have  fellowship 
with  Him  and  receive  of  the  fulness  of  Him  who  is  perfect 
and  who  was  before  all  creation.  All  this  we  have  been  made 
in  these  latter  days  by  Him  who  only  is  supremely  good  and 
who  has  the  gift  of  incorruptibihty;  inasmuch  as  we  are 
conformed  to  His  likeness  and  predestinated  to  become  what 
we  never  were  before,  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  the 
Father,  made  a  first-fruit  of  His  workmanship,  we  have, 
therefore,  received  all  this  at  the  foreordained  season,  accord- 
ing to  the  dispensation  of  the  Word,  who  is  perfect  in  all 
things.  For  He,  who  is  the  mighty  Word  and  very  man, 
redeeming  us  by  His  blood  in  a  reasonable  manner,  gave 


ASIA  MINOR  CONCEPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY     137 

Himself  as  a  ransom  for  those  who  had  been  led  into  captiv- 
ity. And  since  apostasy  tyrannized  over  us  unjustly,  for 
though  by  nature  we  were  God's  possession,  it  yet  ahenated 
us  contrary  to  nature,  making  us  its  own  disciples,  the  Word 
of  God,  powerful  in  all  things  and  constant  in  His  justice, 
dealt  justly  even  with  apostasy  itself,  redeeming  from  it 
what  was  His  own  property.  Not  by  force,  the  way  in  which 
the  apostasy  had  originally  gained  its  mastery  over  us, 
greedily  grasping  at  that  which  was  not  its  own;  but  by 
moral  force  [secundum  suadelam]  as  became  God,  by  per- 
suasion and  not  by  force,  regaining  what  He  wished;  so  that 
justice  might  not  be  violated  and  God's  ancient  handiwork 
might  not  perish.  Therefore,  since  by  His  own  blood  the 
Lord  redeemed  us  and  gave  His  soul  for  our  soul,  and  His 
flesh  for  our  flesh,  and  shed  on  us  His  Father's  spirit  to  unite 
and  join  us  in  communion  God  and  man,  bringing  God  down 
to  men  by  the  descent  of  the  Spirit,  and  raising  up  man 
to  God  by  His  incarnation,  and  by  a  firm  and  true  promise 
giving  us  at  His  advent  incorruptibihty  by  communion 
with  Him,  and  thus  all  the  errors  of  the  heretics  are  de- 
stroyed. 

(b)  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Hcer.,  Ill,  18  :  i,  7.  (MSG,  6  :  932,  937.) 

The  following  is  a  statement  by  Irenaeus  of  his  doctrine  of  reca- 
pitulation, which  combines  the  idea  of  the  second  Adam  of  Paul  and 
the  Johannine  theology. 

Ch.  I.  Since  it  has  been  clearly  demonstrated  that  the 
Word,  who  existed  in  the  beginning  with  God,  and  by  whom 
all  things  were  made,  who  also  was  present  with  the  human 
race,  was  in  these  last  days,  according  to  the  time  appointed 
by  the  Father,  united  to  His  own  workmanship,  having  been 
made  a  man  liable  to  suffering,  every  objection  is  set  aside  of 
those  who  say:  ''If  Christ  was  born  at  that  time,  He  did 
not  exist  before  that  time."  For  I  have  shown  that  the 
Son  of  God  did  not  then  begin  to  be,  since  He  existed  with 
His  Father  always;    but  when  He  was  incarnate,  and  was 


138       THE   CRITICAL  PERIOD:  A.  D.  140-200 

made  man,  He  commenced  afresh  [in  seipso  recapitulavit]  the 
long  line  of  human  beings,  and  furnished  us  in  a  brief  and 
comprehensive  manner  with  salvation;  so  that  what  we  had 
lost  in  Adam — namely,  to  be  according  to  the  image  and 
likeness  of  God — that  we  might  recover  in  Christ  Jesus. 

Ch.  7.  He  caused  human  nature  to  cleave  to  and  to  become 
one  with  God,  as  we  have  said.  For  if  man  had  not  over- 
come the  adversary  of  man,  the  enemy  would  not  have  been 
legitimately  overcome.  And  again,  if  God  had  not  given 
salvation,  we  could  not  have  had  it  securely.  And  if  man 
had  not  been  united  to  God,  he  could  never  have  become  a 
partaker  of  incorruptibihty.  For  it  was  incumbent  upon 
the  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  by  His  relationship  to 
both,  to  bring  about  a  friendship  and  concord,  and  to  present 
man  to  God  and  to  reveal  God  to  man.  For  in  what  way 
could  we  be  partakers  of  the  adoption  of  sons,  if  we  had  not 
received  from  Him,  through  the  Son,  that  fellowship  which 
refers  to  Himself,  if  the  Word,  having  been  made  flesh,  had 
not  entered  into  communion  with  us?  Wherefore  He  passed 
also  through  every  stage  of  life  restoring  to  all  communion 
with  God. 

(c)  Irenagus,  Adv.  Hcsr.,  IV,  18  :  5.    (MSG,  6  :  1027  /.) 

The  conception  of  redemption  as  the  imparting  of  incorruptibility 
connected  itself  easily  with  the  doctrine  of  the  eucharist,  which  had 
been  called  by  Ignatius  of  Antioch  ''the  medicine  of  immortality"  {v. 
supra,  §  12).    With  this  passage  compare  Iren£eus,  Adv.  Hcbt.,  IV,  17:5. 

How  can  they  say  that  the  flesh  which  is  nourished  with 
the  body  of  the  Lord  and  with  His  blood  goes  to  corruption 
and  does  not  partake  of  life?  Let  them,  therefore,  either 
alter  their  opinion  or  cease  from  offering  the  things  men- 
tioned. But  our  opinion  is  in  accordance  with  the  eucharist, 
and  the  eucharist,  in  turn,  establishes  our  opinion.  For 
we  offer  to  Him  His  own,  announcing  consistently  the  fellow- 
ship and  union  of  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit.  For  as  the  bread 
which  is  produced  from  the  earth  when  it  receives  the  invo- 


ASIA  MINOR  CONCEPTION  OF  CHRISTIANITY     139 

cation  of  God  is  no  longer  common  bread,  but  the  eucharist, 
consisting  of  two  realities,  earthly  and  heavenly,  so,  also, 
our  bodies,  when  they  receive  the  eucharist,  are  no  longer 
corruptible,  having  the  hope  of  the  resurrection  unto  eternity. 


PERIOD    IV 

THE  AGE  OF  THE   CONSOLIDATION  OF  THE 
CHURCH:  200  TO  324  A.  D. 

In  the  fourth  period  of  the  Church  under  the  heathen 
Empire,  or  the  period  of  the  consoHdation  of  the  Church, 
the  number  of  Christians  increased  so  rapidly  that  the  rela- 
tion of  the  Roman  State  to  the  Church  became  a  matter  of 
the  gravest  importance  (ch.  i).  During  a  period  of  com- 
parative peace  and  prosperity  the  Church  developed  its 
doctrinal  system  and  its  constitution  (ch.  2).  Although  the 
school  of  Asia  Minor  became  isolated  and  temporarily  ceased 
to  affect  the  bulk  of  the  Church  elsewhere,  the  school  of  the 
apologists  was  brilliantly  continued  at  Alexandria  under 
Clement  and  Origen,  and  later  under  Origen  at  Caesarea 
in  Palestine.  Meanwhile  the  foundations  were  laid  in  North 
Africa  for  a  distinctive  type  of  Western  theology,  inaugurated 
by  TertulHan  and  developed  by  Cyprian.  After  years  of 
alternating  favor  and  local  persecutions,  the  first  general 
persecution  (ch.  3)  broke  upon  the  Church,  rudely  testing 
its  organization  and  ultimately  strengthening  and  furthering 
its  tendencies  toward  a  strictly  hierarchical  constitution.  In 
the  long  period  of  peace  that  followed  (ch.  4),  the  discussions 
that  had  arisen  within  the  Church  as  to  the  relation  of  the 
divine  unity  to  the  divinity  of  Christ  reached  a  temporary 
conclusion,  the  cultus  was  elaborated  and  assumed  the 
essentials  of  its  permanent  form,  and  the  episcopate  was 
made  supreme  over  rival  authorities  within  the  Church, 
becoming  at  once  the  expression  and  organ  of  ecclesiastical 
unity.     At  the  same  time  new  problems  arose;    within  the 

140 


CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324      141 

Church  there  was  the  appearance  of  an  organized  asceticism 
which  appeared  for  a  time  to  be  a  rival  to  the  Church's 
system,  and  outside  the  Church  the  appearance  of  a  hostile 
rival  in  the  rapidly  spreading  Manichaean  system,  in  which 
was  revived,  in  a  better  organized  and  therefore  more  dan- 
gerous form,  the  expelled  Gnosticism.  The  period  ends  with 
the  last  general  persecution  (ch.  5). 

CHAPTER   I.     THE    POLITICAL   AND    RELIGIOUS    CONDI- 
TIONS   OF    THE    EMPIRE 

The  accession  of  Septimius  Severus,  A.  D.  193,  marks  a 
change  in  the  condition  of  the  Empire.  It  was  becoming 
more  harassed  by  frontier  wars,  not  always  waged  success- 
fully. Barbarians  were  gradually  settling  within  the  Empire. 
The  emperors  themselves  were  no  longer  Romans  or  Italians. 
Provincials,  some  not  even  of  the  Latin  race,  assumed  the 
imperial  dignity.  But  it  was  a  period  in  which  the  Roman 
law  was  in  its  most  flourishing  and  brilHant  stage,  under 
such  men  as  Papinian,  Ulpian,  and  others  second  only  to  these 
masters.  Stoic  cosmopolitanism  made  for  wider  conceptions 
of  law  and  a  deeper  sense  of  human  solidarity.  The  Christian 
Church,  however,  profited  little  by  this  (§  34)  until,  in  the 
religious  syncretism  which  became  fashionable  in  the  highest 
circles,  it  was  favored  by  even  the  imperial  family  along 
with  other  Oriental  religions  (§  35).  The  varying  fortunes  of 
the  emperors  necessarily  affected  the  Church  (§  36),  though, 
on  the  whole,  there  was  little  suffering,  and  the  Church  spread 
rapidly,  and  in  many  parts  of  the  Empire  became  a  powerful 
organization  (§  37),  with  which  the  State  would  soon  have 
to  reckon. 

§  34.  State  and  Church  under  Septimius  Severus  and 
Caracalla. 

§  35.   Religious  Syncretism  in  the  Third  Century. 

§  36.  The  ReHgious  PoHcy  of  the  Emperors  from  Helio- 
gabalus  to  Philip  the  Arabian. 


142      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

§  37.  The  Extension  of  the  Church  in  the  First  Half  of 
the  Third  Century. 

§  34.    State  and  Church  under  Septimius  Severus  and 

Caracalla 

Although  Christians  were  at  first  favored  by  Septimius 
Severus,  they  were  still  liable  to  the  severe  laws  against 
secret  societies,  and  the  policy  of  Septimius  was  later  to  en- 
force these  laws.  The  Christians  tried  to  escape  the  penal- 
ties prescribed  against  such  societies  by  taking  the  form  of 
friendly  societies  which  were  expressly  tolerated  by  the  law. 
Nevertheless,  numerous  cases  are  to  be  found  in  various 
parts  of  the  Empire  in  which  Christians  were  put  to  death 
under  the  law.  Yet  the  number  of  martyrs  before  the  gen- 
eral persecution  of  Decius  in  the  middle  of  the  century  was 
relatively  small.  The  position  of  Christians  was  not  mate- 
rially affected  by  the  constitution  of  Caracalla  conferring 
Roman  citizenship  on  all  free  inhabitants  of  the  Empire,  and 
the  constitution  seems  to  have  been  merely  a  fiscal  measure 
which  laid  additional  burdehs  upon  the  provincials. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  1-12. 

(a)  Tertulhan,  Ad  Scapulam,  4.     (MSL,  i  :  781.) 

The  account  of  Tertullian  is  generally  accepted  as  substantially 
correct.  Scapula  was  chief  magistrate  of  Carthage  and,  under  the 
circumstances,  the  author  would  not  have  indulged  his  tendency  to 
rhetorical  embellishment.  Furthermore,  the  book  is  written  with  what 
was  for  Tertullian  great  moderation. 

How  many  rulers,  men  more  resolute  and  more  cruel  than 
you,  have  contrived  to  get  quit  of  such  causes — as  Cincius 
Severus,  who  himself  suggested  the  remedy  at  Thysdris, 
pointing  out  how  Christians  should  answer  that  they  might 
be  acquitted;  as  Vespronius  Candidus,  who  acquitted  a 
Christian  on  the  ground  that  to  satisfy  his  fellow-citizens 
would  create  a  riot;  as  Asper,  who,  in  the  case  of  a  man 
who  under  sHght  torture  had  fallen,  did  not  compel  him  to 


SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS  AND  CARACALLA       143 

offer  sacrifice,  having  owned  among  the  advocates  and  assess- 
ors of  the  court  that  he  was  annoyed  at  having  to  meddle 
with  such  a  case!  Prudens,  too,  at  once  dismissed  a  Christian 
brought  before  him,  perceiving  from  the  indictment  that 
it  was  a  case  of  vexatious  accusation;  tearing  the  document 
in  pieces,  he  refused,  according  to  the  imperial  command, 
to  hear  him  without  the  presence  of  his  accuser.  All  this 
might  be  ofHcially  brought  under  your  notice,  and  by  the 
very  advocates,  who  themselves  are  under  obligations  to 
Christians,  although  they  cry  out  against  us  as  it  suits  them. 
The  clerk  of  one  who  was  liable  to  be  thrown  down  by  an 
evil  spirit  was  set  free;  as  was  also  a  relative  of  another,  and 
the  little  boy  of  a  third.  How  many  men  of  rank  (not  to  men- 
tion common  people)  have  been  cured  of  devils  and  of  diseases ! 
Even  Severus  himself,  the  father  of  Antonine,  was  mindful 
of  the  Christians;  for  he  sought  out  the  Christian  Proclus, 
surnamed  Torpacion,  the  steward  of  Euhodias,  who  once  had 
cured  him  by  means  of  oil,  and  whom  he  kept  in  his  palace 
till  his  death.  Antonine  [Caracalla],  too,  was  brought  up  on 
Christian  milk,i  was  intimately  acquainted  with  this  man. 
But  Severus,  knowing  both  men  and  women  of  the  highest 
rank  to  be  of  this  sect,  not  only  did  not  injure  them,  but 
distinguished  them  with  his  testimony  and  restored  them 
to  us  openly  from  the  raging  populace.^ 

(b)  Laws  Relating  to  Forbidden  Societies. 

I.  Justinian,  Digest,  XLVII,  23  :  i. 

The  following  is  a  passage  taken  from  the  Institutes  of  Marcian, 
Bk.  III. 

By  princely  commands  it  was  prescribed  to  the  governors 
of  provinces  that  they  should  not  permit  social  clubs  and 
that  soldiers  should  not  have  societies  in  the  camp.  But  it 
is  permitted  to  the  poor  to  collect  a  monthly  contribution, 
so  long  as  they  gather  together  only  once  in  a  month,  lest  under 

*  Probably  his  wet-nurse  was  a  Christian. 

2  On  the  occasion  of  his  triumphal  entry  into  Rome. 


144      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

a  pretext  of  this  sort  an  unlawful  society  meet.  And  that 
this  should  be  allowed  not  only  in  the  city,  but  also  in  Italy 
and  the  provinces,  the  divine  Severus  ordered.  But  for  the 
sake  of  religion  they  are  not  forbidden  to  come  together  so 
long  as  they  do  nothing  contrary  to  the  Senatus-consultum, 
by  which  unlawful  societies  are  restrained.  It  is  furthermore 
not  lawful  to  belong  to  more  than  one  lawful  society,  as  this 
was  determined  by  the  divine  brothers  [Caracalla  and  Geta]; 
and  if  any  one  is  in  two,  it  is  ordered  that  it  be  necessary 
for  him  to  choose  in  which  he  prefers  to  be,  and  he  shall 
receive  from  the  society  from  which  he  resigns  that  which 
belongs  to  him  proportionately  of  what  there  is  of  a  common 
fund. 

2.  Justinian,  Digest,  I,  12  :  14. 

From  Ulpian's  treatise,  De  officio  Prcejedi  Urbi. 

The  divine  Severus  ordered  that  those  who  were  accused 
of  meeting  in  forbidden  societies  should  be  accused  before 
the  prefect  of  the  city. 

(c)  Persecutions  under  Severus. 

I.  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  i.     (MSG,  20  :  522.) 

The  following  extract  is  important  not  only  as  a  witness  to  the 
fact  of  the  execution  of  the  laws  against  Christians  in  Alexandria, 
but  also  to  the  extension  of  Christianity  in  the  more  southern  prov- 
inces of  Egypt. 

When  Severus  began  to  persecute  the  churches,  glorious 
testimonies  were  given  everywhere  by  the  athletes  of  religion. 
Especially  numerous  were  they  in  Alexandria,  for  thither, 
as  to  a  more  prominent  theatre,  athletes  of  God  were  sent 
from  Egypt  and  all  Thebais,  according  to  their  merit,  and 
they  won  crowns  from  God  through  their  great  patience  under 
many  tortures  and  every  mode  of  death.  Among  these  was 
Leonidas,  said  to  be  the  father  of  Origen,  who  was  beheaded 
while  his  son  was  still  young. 


SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS  AND  CARACALLA      145 

2.  Spartianus,  Vita  Severi,  XVII,   i.     {Scriptores  Eistorm 
AugustcB.    Ed.  Peter,  1884;   Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  32.) 
The  date  of  the  following  is  A.  D.  202. 

He  forbade,  under  heavy  penalties,  any  to  become  Jews. 
He  made  the  same  regulation  in  regard  to  Christians. 

{d)  Tertullian,  Apol,  39.     (MSL,  i  :  534.) 

In  the  following,  Christian  assembhes,  or  churches,  are  represented 
as  being  a  sort  of  friendly  society,  similar  but  superior  to  those  existing 
all  over  the  Empire,  common  and  tolerated  among  the  poorer  mem- 
bers of  society.    The  date  of  the  Apology  is  197. 

Though  we  have  our  treasure-chest,  it  is  not  made  up  of 
purchase  money,  as  if  our  religion  had  its  price.  On  the 
regular  day  in  the  month,  or  when  one  prefers,  each  one  makes 
a  small  donation;  but  only  if  it  be  his  pleasure,  and  only  if 
he  be  able;  for  no  one  is  compelled,  but  gives  voluntarily. 
These  gifts  are,  as  it  were,  piety's  deposit  fund.  For  they 
are  taken  thence  and  spent,  not  on  feasts  and  drinking-bouts, 
and  thankless  eating-houses,  but  to  support  and  bury  poor 
people,  to  supply  the  wants  of  boys  and  girls  destitute  of 
means  and  parents,  and  of  old  persons  confined  to  the 
house,  Kkewise  the  shipwrecked,  and  if  there  happen  to  be 
any  in  the  mines,  or  banished  to  the  islands,  or  shut  up  in 
the  prisons  for  nothing  but  their  fidelity  to  the  cause  of  God's 
Church,  they  become  the  nurslings  of  their  confession.  But 
it  is  mainly  for  such  work  of  love  that  many  place  a  brand 
upon  us.    See,  they  say,  how  they  love  one  another! 

{e)  The  Passion  of  Perpetua  and  Felicitas.    (MSL,  3  :  51.) 

(C/.  Knopf,  pp.  44-57-) 

The  date  of  this  martyrdom  is  A.  D.  203.  The  Passio  SS.  PerpetucB 
et  Felicitatis  has  been  attributed  to  TertuUian.  It  betrays  clear  evi- 
dence of  Montanist  sympathies.  It  has  even  been  thought  by  some 
that  the  martyrs  themselves  were  Montanists.  At  that  date  probably 
not  a  few  who  sympathized  with  Montanism  were  still  in  good  standing 
in  certain  parts  of  the  Church.  At  any  rate,  the  day  of  their  commem- 
oration has  been  from  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  at  Rome 
March  7.    See  Kirch,  p.  323. 


146      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

The  day  of  their  victory  dawned,  and  they  proceeded 
from  the  prison  into  the  amphitheatre,  as  if  to  happiness, 
joyous  and  of  brilHant  countenances;  if ,  perchance,  shrinking, 
it  was  with  joy  and  not  with  fear.  Perpetua  followed  with 
placid  look,  and  with  step  and  gait  as  a  matron  of  Christ, 
beloved  of  God,  casting  down  the  lustre  of  her  eyes  from  the 
gaze  of  all.  Likewise  Felicitas  came,  rejoicing  that  she  had 
safely  brought  forth,  so  that  she  might  fight  with  the  beasts. 
.  .  .  And  when  they  were  brought  to  the  gate,  and  were 
constrained  to  put  on  the  clothing — the  men  that  of  the  priests 
of  Saturn,  and  the  women  that  of  those  who  were  consecrated 
to  Ceres — that  noble-minded  woman  resisted  even  to  the  end 
with  constancy.  For  she  said:  ^'We  have  come  thus  far  of 
our  own  accord,  that  our  Hberty  might  not  be  restrained. 
For  this  reason  we  have  yielded  our  minds,  that  we  might 
not  do  any  such  thing  as  this;  we  have  agreed  on  this  with 
you.''  Injustice  acknowledged  the  justice;  the  tribune  per- 
mitted that  they  be  brought  in  simply  as  they  were.  Per- 
petua sang  psalms,  already  treading  under  foot  the  head  of 
the  Egyptian  [seen  in  a  vision;  see  preceding  chapters];  Revo- 
catus  and  Saturninus  and  Saturus  uttered  threatenings 
against  the  gazing  people  about  this  martyrdom.  When 
they  came  within  sight  of  Hilarianus,  by  gesture  and  nod 
they  began  to  say  to  Hilarianus:  ^'Thou  judgest  us,  but 
God  will  judge  thee."  At  this  the  exasperated  people  de- 
manded that  they  should  be  tormented  with  scourges  as  they 
passed  along  the  rank  of  the  venatores.  And  they,  indeed, 
rejoiced  that  they  should  have  incurred  any  one  of  their 
Lord's  passions. 

But  He  who  had  said,  ^'Ask  and  ye  shall  receive,"  gave  to 
them,  when  they  asked,  that  death  which  each  one  had  de- 
sired. For  when  they  had  been  discoursing  among  themselves 
about  their  wish  as  to  their  martyrdom,  Saturninus,  indeed, 
had  professed  that  he  wished  that  he  might  be  thrown  to  all 
the  beasts;  doubtless  that  he  might  wear  a  more  glorious 
crown.     Therefore,  in  the  beginning  of   the   exhibition   he 


SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS  AND  CARACALLA       147 

and  Revocatus  made  trial  of  the  leopard,  and,  moreover,  upon 
the  scaffold  they  were  harassed  by  the  bear.  Saturus,  how- 
ever, held  nothing  in  greater  horror  than  a  bear;  but  he 
thought  he  would  be  finished  by  one  bite  of  a  leopard. 
Therefore,  when  a  wild  boar  was  supplied,  it  was  the  hunts- 
man who  had  supplied  that  boar,  and  not  Saturus,  who  was 
gored  by  that  same  beast  and  who  died  the  day  after  the 
shows.  Saturus  only  was  drawn  out;  and  when  he  had  been 
bound  on  the  floor  near  to  a  bear,  the  bear  would  not  come 
forth  from  his  den.  And  so  Saturus  for  the  second  time  was 
recalled,  unhurt. 

Moreover,  for  the  young  women  the  devil,  rivalling  their 
sex  also  in  that  of  the  beasts,  prepared  a  very  fierce  cow, 
provided  especially  for  that  purpose  contrary  to  custom. 
And  so,  stripped  and  clothed  with  nets,  they  were  led  forth. 
The  populace  shuddered  as  they  saw  one  young  woman  of 
delicate  frame,  and  another  with  breasts  still  dropping  from 
her  recent  childbirth.  So,  being  recalled,  they  were  unbound. 
Perpetua  was  first  led  in.  She  was  tossed  and  fell  on  her 
loins;  and  when  she  saw  her  tunic  torn  from  her  side,  she 
drew  it  over  her  as  a  veil  for  her  thighs,  mindful  of  her  mod- 
esty rather  than  of  her  suffering.  Then  she  was  called  for 
again,  and  bound  up  her  dishevelled  hair;  for  it  was  not 
becoming  for  a  martyr  to  suffer  with  dishevelled  hair,  lest 
she  should  appear  to  be  mourning  in  her  glory.  She  rose  up, 
and  when  she  saw  Felicitas  crushed  she  approached  and 
gave  her  her  hand  and  lifted  her  up.  And  both  of  them 
stood  together;  and  the  brutahty  of  the  populace  being 
appeased,  they  were  recalled  to  the  Sanavivarian  gate.  Then 
Perpetua  was  received  by  a  certain  one  who  was  still  a 
catechumen,  Rusticus  by  name,  who  kept  close  to  her;  and 
she,  as  if  roused  from  sleep,  so  deeply  had  she  been  in  the 
Spirit  and  in  an  ecstasy,  began  to  look  around  her  and  to 
say  to  the  amazement  of  all:  ''I  do  not  know  when  we  are 
to  be  led  out  to  that  cow."  Thus  she  said,  and  when  she 
had  heard  what  had  already  happened,  she  did  not  believe 


148      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

it  until  she  had  perceived  certain  signs  of  injury  in  her  own 
body  and  in  her  dress,  and  had  recognized  the  catechumen. 
Afterward,  causing  that  catechumen  and  the  brother  to 
approach,  she  addressed  them,  saying:  ''Stand  fast  in  the 
faith,  and  love  one  another,  all  of  you,  and  be  not  offended 
at  our  sufferings." 

The  same  Saturus  at  the  other  entrance  exhorted  the 
soldier  Prudens,  saying:  ''Assuredly  here  I  am,  as  I  have 
promised  and  foretold,  for  up  to  this  moment  I  have  felt  no 
beast.  And  now  believe  with  your  whole  heart.  Lo,  I  am 
going  forth  to  the  leopard,  and  I  shall  be  destroyed  with  one 
bite."  And  immediately  on  the  conclusion  of  the  exhibition 
he  was  thrown  to  the  leopard;  and  with  one  bite  by  it  he  was 
bathed  with  such  a  quantity  of  blood  that  the  people  shouted 
out  to  him,  as  he  was  returning,  the  testimony  of  his  second 
baptism:  "Saved  and  washed,  saved  and  washed."  Mani- 
festly he  was  assuredly  saved  who  had  been  glorified  in  such 
a  spectacle.  Then  to  the  soldier  Prudens  he  said:  "Farewell, 
and  be  mindful  of  my  faith;  and  let  not  these  things  disturb, 
but  confirm  you."  And  at  the  same  time  he  asked  for  a  little 
ring  from  his  finger,  and  returned  it  to  him  bathed  in  his 
wound,  leaving  to  him  an  inherited  token  and  memory  of 
his  blood.  And  then  lifeless  he  was  cast  down  with  the  rest, 
to  be  slaughtered  in  the  usual  place.  And  when  the  populace 
called  for  them  into  the  midst,  that  as  the  sword  penetrated 
into  their  body  they  might  make  their  eyes  partners  in  the 
murder,  they  rose  up  of  their  own  accord,  and  transferred 
themselves  whither  the  people  wished;  but  they  first  kissed 
one  another,  that  they  might  consummate  their  martyrdom 
with  the  rites  of  peace.  The  rest,  indeed,  immovable  and 
in  silence,  received  the  sword;  and  so  did  Saturus,  who  had 
also  first  ascended  the  ladder,  and  first  gave  up  his  spirit, 
for  he  was  waiting  for  Perpetua.  But  Perpetua,  that  she 
might  taste  some  pain,  being  pierced  between  the  ribs,  cried 
out  loudly  and  she  herself  placed  the  wavering  right  hand 
of  the  youthful  gladiator  to  her  throat.     Possibly  such   a 


SEPTIMIUS  SEVERUS  AND  CARACALLA      149 

woman  could  not  have  been  slain  unless  she  herself  had 
willed  it,  because  she  was  feared  by  the  impure  spirit. 

O  most  brave  and  blessed  martyrs!  O  truly  called  and 
chosen  unto  the  glory  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ!  Whoever 
magnifies,  and  honors,  and  adores  Him,  assuredly  ought 
to  read  these  examples  for  the  edification  of  the  Church,  not 
less  than  the  ancient  ones,  so  that  new  virtues  also  may 
testify  that  one  and  the  same  Holy  Spirit  is  always  operating 
even  until  now,  and  God  the  Father  Omnipotent,  and  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  whose  is  glory  and  infinite  power 
forever  and  ever.     Amen. 

(/■)  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  111,  8.    (MSG,  11  :  930.) 

Origen  is  writing  just  before  the  first  general  persecution  under 
Decius  about  the  middle  of  the  century.  He  points  out  the  relatively 
small  number  of  those  suffering  persecution. 

With  regard  to  Christians,  because  they  were  taught  not 
to  avenge  themselves  upon  their  enemies,  and  have  thus 
observed  laws  of  a  mild  and  philanthropic  character;  and 
because,  although  they  were  able,  yet  they  would  not  have 
made  war  even  if  they  had  received  authority  to  do  so;  for 
this  cause  they  have  obtained  this  from  God:  that  He  has 
always  warred  on  their  behalf,  and  at  times  has  restrained 
those  who  rose  up  against  them  and  who  wished  to  destroy 
them.  For  in  order  to  remind  others,  that  seeing  a  few  en- 
gaged in  a  struggle  in  behalf  of  rehgion,  they  might  also  be 
better  fitted  to  despise  death,  a  few,  at  various  times,  and 
these  easily  numbered,  have  endured  death  for  the  sake  of  the 
Christian  religion;  God  not  permitting  the  whole  nation 
[i.  e.,  the  Christians]  to  be  exterminated,  but  desiring  that  it 
should  continue,  and  that  the  whole  world  should  be  filled 
with  this  salvation  and  the  doctrines  of  religion. 

ig)  Justinian,  Digest,  I,  5  :  17. 

The  edict  of  Caracalla  (Marcus  Aurelius  Antoninus)  conferring 
Roman  citizenship  upon  all  free  inhabitants  of  the  Empire  has  not 
been  preserved.  It  is  known  only  from  a  brief  extract  from  the 
twenty-second  book  of  Ulpian's  work  on  the  Praetorian  Edict,  contained 
in  the  Digest  of  Justinian. 


I50      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Those  who  were  in  the  Roman  world  were  made  Roman 
citizens  by  the  constitution  of  the  Emperor  Antoninus. 

§  35.     Religious  Syncretism  in  the  Third  Century 

In  the  third  century  religious  syncretism  took  two  leading 
forms — the  Mithraic  worship,  which  spread  rapidly  throughout 
the  Empire,  and  the  fashionable  interest  in  novel  religions 
fostered  by  the  imperial  court.  Mithraism  was  especially 
prevalent  in  the  army,  and  at  army  posts  have  been  found 
numerous  remains  of  sanctuaries,  inscriptions,  etc.  It  was 
by  far  the  purest  of  the  religions  that  invaded  the  Roman 
Empire,  and  drew  its  leading  ideas  from  Persian  sources. 
The  fashionable  court  interest  in  novel  religions  seems  not 
to  have  amounted  to  much  as  a  positive  rehgious  force, 
which  Mithraism  certainly  was,  though  on  account  of  it 
Christianity  was  protected  and  even  patronized  by  the  ladies 
of  the  imperial  household.  Among  the  works  produced  by 
this  interest  was  the  Life  of  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  written 
by  Philostratus  at  the  command  of  the  Empress  Julia  Domna. 
Apollonius  was  a  preacher  or  teacher  of  ethics  and  the  Neo- 
Pythagorean  philosophy  in  the  first  century,  ob.  A.  D.  97. 

Additional  source  material:  Philostratus,  Life  of  Apollonius  (the 
latest  English  translation,  by  F.  C.  Conybeare,  with  Greek  text  in  the 
Loeb  Classical  Library,  191 2). 

Mithraic  Prayer,  Albrecht  Dietrich,  Eine  Mithrasliturgie, 
Leipsic,  1903. 

The  following  prayer  is  the  opening  invocation  of  what  appears 
to  be  a  Mithraic  liturgy,  and  may  date  from  a  period  earlier  than  the 
fourth  century.  It  gives,  as  is  natural,  no  elaborated  statement  of 
Mithraic  doctrine,  but,  as  in  all  prayer,  much  is  implied  in  the  forms 
used  and  the  spirit  of  the  rehgion  breathed  through  it.  The  combina- 
tion has  already  begun  as  is  shown  by  the  doctrine  of  the  four  elements. 
It  should  be  added  that  Professor  Cumont  does  not  regard  it  as  a 
Mithraic  liturgy  at  all,  but  accounts  for  the  distinct  mention  of  the 
name  Mithras,  which  is  to  be  found  in  some  parts,  to  a  common  ten- 
dency of  semi-magical  incantations  to  employ  as  many  deities  as  pos- 
sible. 


RELIGIOUS   POLICY  OF  THE  EMPERORS     151 

First  Origin  of  my  origin,  first  Beginning  of  my  beginning, 
Spirit  of  Spirit,  first  of  the  spirit  in  me.  Fire  which  to  compose 
me  has  been  given  of  God,  first  of  the  fire  in  me.  Water  of 
water,  first  of  the  water  in  me.  Earthy  Substance  of  earthy 
substance,  first  of  the  earthy  substance,  the  entire  body  of 
me,  N.  N.  son  of  N.  N.,  completely  formed  by  an  honorable 
arm  and  an  immortal  right  hand  in  the  lightless  and  illumi- 
nated world,  in  the  inanimated  and  the  animated.  If  it 
seem  good  to  you  to  restore  me  to  an  immortal  generation, 
who  am  held  by  my  underlying  nature,  that  after  this  present 
need  which  presses  sorely  upon  me  I  may  behold  the  immor- 
tal Beginning  with  the  immortal  Spirit,  the  immortal  Water, 
the  Solid  and  the  Air,  that  I  may  be  born  again,  by  the 
thought,  that  I  may  be  consecrated  and  the  holy  Spirit  may 
breathe  in  me,  that  I  may  gaze  with  astonishment  at  the 
holy  Fire,  that  I  may  look  upon  abysmal  and  frightful  Water 
of  the  sun-rising,  and  the  generative  Ether  poured  around 
may  listen  to  me.  For  I  will  to-day  look  with  immortal  eyes, 
I  who  was  begotten  a  mortal  from  a  mortal  womb,  exalted 
by  a  mighty  working  power  and  incorruptible  right  hand, 
I  may  look  with  an  immortal  spirit  upon  the  immortal  Eon 
and  the  Lord  of  the  fiery  crowns,  purified  by  holy  consecra- 
tions, since  a  little  under  me  stands  the  human  power  of 
mind,  which  I  shall  regain  after  the  present  bitter,  oppressive, 
and  debt-laden  need,  I,  N.  N.  the  son  of  N.  N.,  according  to 
God's  unchangeable  decree,  for  it  is  not  within  my  power, 
born  mortal,  to  mount  up  with  the  golden  fight  flashes  of 
the  immortal  illuminator.  Stand  still,  corruptible  human 
nature,  and  leave  me  free  after  the  pitiless  and  crushing 
necessity. 

§  36.    The    Religious    Policy    of    the   Emperors   from 
Heliogabalus  to  Philip  the  Arabian,  217-249 

With  the  brief  exception  of  the  reign  of  Maximinus  Thrax 
(235-238),  Christians  enjoyed  peace  from  the  death  of  Cara- 
calla  to  the  death  of  Philip  the  Arabian.    This  was  not  due 


152      CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

to  disregard  of  the  laws  against  Christians  nor  to  indifference 
to  suspected  dangers  to  the  Empire  arising  from  the  new 
rehgion,  but  to  the  policy  of  rehgious  syncretism  which  had 
come  in  with  the  family  of  Severus.  The  wife  of  Septimius 
Severus  was  the  daughter  of  Juhus  Bassianus,  priest  of  the 
Sun-god  of  Emesa,  and  of  the  rulers  of  the  dynasty  of  Severus 
one,  Heliogabalus,  was  himself  a  priest  of  the  same  syncre- 
tistic  cult,  and  another,  Alexander,  was  under  the  influence 
of  the  women  of  the  same  priestly  family. 

(a)  Lampridius,  Vita  Heliogabali,  3,  6,  7.  Preuschen,  Ana- 
lecta,  I,  §  12. 

Lampridius  is  one  of  the  Scriptores  HistoricB  Augustce,  by  whom  is  a 
series  of  lives  of  the  Roman  emperors.  The  series  dates  from  the  fourth 
century,  and  is  of  importance  as  containing  much  information  which 
is  not  otherwise  accessible.  The  dates  of  the  various  Hves  are  difficult 
to  determine.  Avitus  Bassianus,  known  as  Heliogabalus,  a  name  he 
assumed,  reigned  218-222. 

Ch.  3.  But  when  he  had  once  entered  the  city,  he  enrolled 
Hehogabalus  among  the  gods  and  built  a  temple  to  him  on 
the  Palatine  Hill  next  the  imperial  palace,  desiring  to  trans- 
fer to  that  temple  the  image  of  Cybele,  the  fire  of  Vesta,  the 
Palladium,  the  sacred  shields,  and  all  things  venerated  by  the 
Romans;  and  he  did  this  so  that  no  other  god  than  Hehogab- 
alus should  be  worshipped  at  Rome.  He  said,  besides,  that 
the  religions  of  the  Jews  and  the  Samaritans  and  the  Chris- 
tian worship  should  be  brought  thither,  that  the  priesthood 
of  Hehogabalus  should  possess  the  secrets  of  all  religions. 

Ch.  6.  Not  only  did  he  wish  to  extinguish  the  Roman 
religions,  but  he  was  eager  for  one  thing  thoughout  the  entire 
world — that  Hehogabalus  should  everywhere  be  worshipped 
as  god. 

Ch.  7.  He  asserted,  in  fact,  that  all  the  gods  were  servants 
of  his  god,  since  some  he  called  his  chamber-servants,  others 
slaves,  and  others  servants  in  various  capacities. 

{h)  Lampridius,  Vita  Alexandri  Severi,  29,  43,  49.  Preu- 
schen, Analecta,  I,  §  13. 


RELIGIOUS  POLICY  OF  THE  EMPERORS     153 

Alexander  Severus  (222-235)  succeeded  his  cousin  Heliogabalus. 
The  mother  of  Alexander,  Julia  Mammasa,  sister  of  JuHa  Soaemias, 
mother  of  Heliogabalus,  was  a  granddaughter  of  Julius  Bassianus, 
whose  daughter,  JuHa  Domna,  had  married  Septimius  Severus.  It  was 
through  marriages-  with  the  female  descendants  of  Julius,  who  was 
priest  of  the  Sun-god  at  Emesa,  that  the  members  of  the  dynasty  of 
Severus  were  connected  and  their  attitude  toward  religion  deter- 
mined. It  was  in  the  reign  of  Alexander  that  syncretism  favorable  to 
Christianity  was  at  its  height. 

Ch.  29.  This  was  his  manner  of  life:  as  soon  as  there  was 
opportunity — that  is,  if  he  had  not  spent  the  night  with  his 
wife — he  performed  his  devotions  in  the  early  morning  hours 
in  his  lararium,  in  which  he  had  statues  of  the  divine  princes 
and  also  a  select  number  of  the  best  men  and  the  more  holy 
spirits,  among  whom  he  had  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  and  as  a 
writer  of  his  times  says,  Christ,  Abraham,  and  Orpheus,  and 
others  similar,  as  well  as  statues  of  his  ancestors. 

Ch.  43.  He  wished  to  erect  a  temple  to  Christ  and  to 
number  Him  among  the  gods.  Hadrian,  also,  is  said  to  have 
thought  of  doing  this,  and  commanded  temples  without  any 
images  to  be  erected  in  all  cities,  and  therefore  these  temples, 
because  they  have  no  image  of  the  Divinity,  are  to-day  called 
Hadriani,  which  he  is  said  to  have  prepared  for  this  end. 
But  Alexander  was  prevented  from  doing  this  by  those  who, 
consulting  the  auspices,  learned  that  if  ever  this  were  done 
all  would  be  Christians,  and  the  other  temples  would  have  to 
be  deserted. 

Ch.  49.  When  the  Christians  took  possession  of  a  piece  of 
land  which  belonged  to  the  public  domain  and  in  opposi- 
tion to  them  the  guild  of  cooks  claimed  that  it  belonged  to 
them,  he  decreed  that  it  was  better  that  in  that  place  God 
should  be  worshipped  in  some  fashion  rather  than  that  it 
be  given  to  the  cooks. 

(c)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  21.    (MSG,  20  :  574.) 

The  mother  of  the  Emperor,  whose  name  was  Julia  Mam- 
masa, was  a  most  pious  woman,  if  ever  one  was.  When  the 
fame  of  Origen   had   extended   everywhere  and  had   come 


154      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

even  to  her  ears,  she  desired  greatly  to  see  the  man,  and  to 
make  trial  of  his  understanding  of  divine  things,  which  was 
admired  by  all.  When  she  was  staying  for  a  time  in  Antioch, 
she  sent  for  him  with  a  military  escort.  Having  remained 
with  her  for  a  while  and  shown  her  many  things  which  were 
for  the  glory  of  the  Lord  and  of  the  excellency  of  divine 
teaching,  he  hastened  back  to  his  accustomed  labors. 

{d)  FirmiHanus,  Ep.  ad  Cyprianum,  in  Cyprian,  Ep.  75. 
(MSL,  3  :  121 1.)     Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  §  14  :  2. 

The  following  epistle  is  found  among  the  Epistles  of  Cyprian,  to 
whom  it  is  addressed.  It  is  of  importance  in  connection  with  the 
persecution  of  Maximinus,  throwing  light  on  the  occasion  and  extent 
of  the  persecution  and  relating  instances  of  strange  fanaticism  and 
exorcism. 

But  I  wish  to  tell  you  about  an  affair  connected  with  this 
very  matter  [baptism  by  heretics,  the  main  subject  of  the 
epistle,  V.  infra,  §  52]  which  occurred  among  us.  About 
twenty  years  ago,  in  the  time  after  Emperor  Alexander,  there 
happened  in  these  parts  many  struggles  and  difficulties,  either 
in  common  to  all  men  or  privately  to  Christians.  There  were, 
furthermore,  many  and  frequent  earthquakes,  so  that  many 
cities  throughout  Cappadocia  and  Pontus  were  thrown  down; 
and  some  even  were  dragged  down  into  the  abyss  and  swal- 
lowed by  the  gaping  earth.  From  this,  also,  there  arose  a 
severe  persecution  against  the  Christian  name.  This  arose 
suddenly  after  the  long  peace  of  the  previous  age.  Because 
of  the  unexpected  and  unaccustomed  evil,  it  was  rendered 
more  terrible  for  the  disturbance  of  our  people. 

Serenianus  was  at  that  time  governor  of  our  province,  a 
bitter  and  cruel  persecutor.  But  when  the  faithful  had  been 
thus  disturbed  and  were  fleeing  hither  and  thither  from  fear 
of  persecution  and  were  leaving  their  native  country  and 
crossing  over  to  other  regions — for  there  was  opportunity  of 
crossing  over,  because  this  persecution  was  not  over  the 
whole  world,  but  was  local — there  suddenly  arose  among  us 
a  certain  woman  who  in  a  state  of  ecstasy  announced  herself 


RELIGIOUS  POLICY  OF  THE  EMPERORS     155 

as  a  prophetess  and  acted  as  if  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
And  she  was  so  moved  by  the  power  of  the  chief  demons  that 
for  a  long  time  she  disturbed  the  brethren  and  deceived  them; 
for  she  accompHshed  certain  wonderful  and  portentous  things : 
thus,  she  promised  that  she  would  cause  the  earth  to  be 
shaken,  not  that  the  power  of  the  demon  was  so  great  that 
he  could  shake  the  earth  and  disturb  the  elements,  but  that 
sometimes  a  wicked  spirit,  foreseeing  and  understanding  that 
there  will  be  an  earthquake,  pretends  that  he  will  do  what 
he  foresees  will  take  place.  By  these  lies  and  boastings  he 
had  so  subdued  the  minds  of  several  that  they  obeyed  him 
and  followed  whithersoever  he  commanded  and  led.  He 
would  also  make  that  woman  walk  in  the  bitter  cold  of 
winter  with  bare  feet  over  the  frozen  snow,  and  not  to  be 
troubled  or  hurt  in  any  respect  by  walking  in  this  fashion. 
Moreover,  she  said  she  was  hurrying  to  Judea  and  Jerusa- 
lem, pretending  that  she  had  come  thence.  Here,  also,  she 
deceived  Rusticus,  one  of  the  presbyters,  and  another  one 
who  was  a  deacon,  so  that  they  had  intercourse  with  the 
same  woman.  This  was  shortly  after  detected.  For  there 
suddenly  appeared  before  her  one  of  the  exorcists,  a  man 
approved  and  always  well  versed  in  matters  of  religious  dis- 
cipline; he,  moved  by  the  exhortation  of  many  of  the  brethren, 
also,  who  were  themselves  strong  in  the  faith,  and  praisewor- 
thy, raised  himself  up  against  that  wicked  spirit  to  overcome 
it;  for  the  spirit  a  little  while  before,  by  its  subtle  deceit- 
fulness,  had  predicted,  furthermore,  that  a  certain  adverse 
and  unbeheving  tempter  would  come.  Yet  that  exorcist, 
inspired  by  God's  grace,  bravely  resisted  and  showed  that 
he  who  before  was  regarded  as  holy  was  a  most  wicked  spirit. 
But  that  woman,  who  previously,  by  the  wiles  and  deceits 
of  the  demon,  was  attempting  many  things  for  the  deception 
of  the  faithful,  had  among  other  things  by  which  she  deceived 
many  also  frequently  dared  this — to  pretend  that  with  an 
invocation,  not  to  be  contemned,  she  sanctified  bread  and 
consecrated  the  eucharist  and  offered  sacrifice  to  the  Lord 


156      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

without  the  sacrament  as  customarily  uttered;  and  to  have 
baptized  many,  making  use  of  the  usual  and  lawful  words  of 
interrogation,  that  nothing  might  seem  to  be  different  from 
the  ecclesiastical  and  lawful  mode. 

{e)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  34.  (MSG,  20  :  595.)  Preu- 
schen,  Analecta,  I,  §  15,  and  Kirch,  n.  397. 

The  following  tradition  that  Philip  the  Arabian  was  a  Christian  is 
commonly  regarded  as  doubtful.  That  he  favored  the  Christians, 
and  even  protected  them,  may  be  the  basis  for  such  a  report. 

When  Gordianus  (238-244)  had  been  Roman  Emperor  for 
six  years,  PhiHp  (244-249)  succeeded  him.  It  is  reported  that 
he,  being  a  Christian,  desired  on  the  day  of  the  last  paschal 
vigil  to  share  with  the  multitude  in  the  prayers  of  the  Church, 
but  was  not  permitted  by  him  who  then  presided  to  enter 
until  he  had  made  confession  and  numbered  himself  among 
those  who  were  reckoned  as  transgressors  and  who  occupied 
the  place  of  penitence.  For  if  he  had  not  done  this,  he  would 
never  have  been  received  by  him,  on  account  of  the  many 
crimes  he  had  committed,  and  it  is  said  that  he  obeyed 
readily,  manifesting  in  his  conduct  a  genuine  and  pious  fear 
of  God. 

§  37.    The  Extension  of  the  Church  at  the  Middle  of 
THE  Third  Century 

Some  approximately  correct  idea  of  the  extension  of  the 
Church  by  the  middle  of  the  third  century  may  be  gathered 
from  a  precise  statement  of  the  organization  of  the  largest 
church,  that  at  Rome,  about  the  year  250  (a),  from  the  size 
of  provincial  synods,  of  which  we  have  detailed  statements 
for  North  Africa  (b),  from  references  to  organized  and  appar- 
ently numerous  churches  in  various  places  not  mentioned  in 
earHer  documents  (c).  That  the  Church,  at  least  in  Egypt 
and  parts  adjacent,  had  ceased  to  be  confined  chiefly  to  the 
cities  and  that  it  was  composed  of  persons  of  all  social  ranks 
is  attested  by  Origen  (d). 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  THE   CHURCH         157 

{a)  Cornelius,  Ep.  ad  Fabium,  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI, 
43.    (MSG,  20  :  622.)    Cf.  Kirch,  n.  222/. 
Cornelius  was  bishop  of  Rome  251-253. 

This  avenger  of  the  Gospel  [Novatus]  did  not  then  know 
that  there  should  be  one  bishop  in  a  Catholic  church;  yet  he 
was  not  ignorant  (for  how  could  he  be)  that  in  it  [i.  e.,  the 
Roman  church]  there  were  forty-six  presbyters,  seven  dea- 
cons, seven  subdeacons,  forty-two  acolyths,  fifty-two  exor- 
cists, readers,  and  janitors,  and  over  fifteen  hundred  widows 
and  persons  in  distress,  all  of  whom  the  grace  and  kindness  of 
the  Master  nourished.  But  not  even  this  great  multitude,  so 
necessary  in  the  Church,  nor  those  who  through  God's  prov- 
idence were  rich  and  full,  together  with  very  many,  even 
innumerable,  people,  could  turn  him  from  such  desperation 
and  recall  him  to  the  Church. 

(b)  Cyprian,  Epistulce  71  [  =  70]  (MSL,  4 :  424)  and  59:  10 

[  =  54]  (MSL,  3:  877). 

The  church  in  North  Africa  had  grown  very  rapidly  before  Cyprian 
was  elevated  to  the  see  of  Carthage.  An  evidence  of  this  is  the  num- 
ber of  councils  held  in  North  Africa.  That  held  under  Agrippinus, 
between  218  and  222,  was  the  first  known  in  that  part  of  the  Church. 
Under  Cyprian  a  council  was  held  at  Carthage  in  258  at  which  no 
less  than  seventy  bishops,  whose  names  and  opinions  have  been 
preserved,  are  given.     See  ANF,  V,  565  f. 

£^.  71  [  =  70].     Ad  Quintum. 

Which  thing,  indeed,  Agrippinus  [A.  D.  218-222],  also  a 
man  of  worthy  memory,  with  his  fellow-bishops,  who  at  that 
time  governed  the  Lord's  Church  in  the  province  of  Africa 
and  Numidia,  decreed,  and  by  the  well-weighed  examination 
of  the  common  council  estabhshed. 

^P'  59  [  =  54]'  lo-     Ad  Cornelium. 

I  have  also  intimated  to  you,  my  brother,  by  Felicianus, 
that  there  had  come  to  Carthage  Privatus,  an  old  heretic  in 
the  colony  of  Lambesa,  many  years  ago  condemned  for  many 
and  grave  crimes  by  the  judgment  of  ninety  bishops,  and 


158      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

severely  remarked  upon  in  the  letters  of  Fabian  and  Donatus, 
also  our  predecessors,  as  is  not  hidden  from  your  knowledge. 

(c)  Cyprian,  Epistula  67  [  =  68].    (MSL,  3  :  1057,  1065.) 

The  following  extracts  from  Cyprian's  Epistle  *'To  the  Clergy  and 
People  abiding  in  Spain,  concerning  Basilides  and  Martial,"  is  of 
importance  as  bearing  upon  the  development  of  the  appellate  juris- 
diction of  the  Roman  see,  for  which  see  the  epistle  in  its  entirety  as 
given  in  Cyprian's  works,  ANF,  vol.  V,  for  the  treatment  of  the  vexed 
question  of  discipline  in  the  case  of  those  receiving  certificates  that 
they  had  sacrificed  (see  below,  §§  45/.),  and  as  the  first  definite  state 
ments  as  to  localities  in  Spain  where  there  were  Christians  and  bishops 
placed  over  the  Church.  The  mass  of  martyrdoms  that  have  been 
preserved  refer  to  still  others. 

Cyprian  ...  to  Felix,  the  presbyter,  and  to  the  peoples 
abiding  in  Legio  [Leon]  and  Asturica  [Astorga],  also  to  LaeHus, 
the  deacon,  and  the  people  abiding  in  Emerita  [Merida],  breth- 
ren in  the  Lord,  greeting.  When  we  had  come  together, 
dearly  beloved  brethren,  we  read  your  letters,  which,  accord- 
ing to  the  integrity  of  your  faith  and  your  fear  of  God,  you 
wrote  to  us  by  Felix  and  Sabinus,  our  fellow-bishops,  signi- 
fying that  Basilides  and  Martial,  who  had  been  stained  with 
the  certificates  of  idolatry  and  bound  with  the  consciousness 
of  wicked  crimes,  ought  not  to  exercise  the  episcopal  office 
and  administer  the  priesthood  of  God.  Wherefore,  since  we 
have  written,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  and  as  Felix  and  Sa- 
binus, our  colleagues,  afSrm,  and  as  another  Felix,  of  Caesar- 
Augusta  [Saragossa],  a  maintainer  of  the  faith  and  a  defender 
of  the  truth,  signifies  in  his  letter,  Basilides  and  Martial  have 
been  contaminated  by  the  abominable  certificate  of  idolatry. 

{d)  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  III,  9.    (MSG,  11  :  951.) 

With  the  following  should  be  compared  the  statements  of  Pliny, 
more  than  a  hundred  years  earlier,  relative  to  Bithynia.   See  above,  §  7. 

Celsus  says  that  ''if  all  men  wished  to  become  Christians, 
the  latter  would  not  desire  it."  That  this  is  false,  is  evident 
from  this,  that  Christians  do  not  neglect,  as  far  as  they  are 
able,  to  take  care  to  spread  their  doctrines  throughout  the 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  THE  CHURCH         159 

whole  world.  Some,  accordingly,  have  made  it  their  business 
to  go  round  about  not  only  through  cities,  but  even  villages 
and  country  houses,  that  they  may  persuade  others  to  become 
pious  worshippers  of  God.  ...  At  present,  indeed,  when 
because  of  the  multitude  of  those  who  have  embraced  the 
teaching,  not  only  rich  men,  but  also  some  persons  of  rank 
and  delicate  and  high-born  ladies,  receive  the  teachers  of 
the  Word,  there  will  be  some  who  dare  to  say  that  it  is  for 
the  sake  of  a  Kttle  glory  that  certain  assume  the  office  of 
Christian  teachers.  In  the  beginning,  when  there  was  much 
danger,  especially  to  its  teachers,  this  suspicion  could  have 
had  no  place. 

CHAPTER    II.     THE   INTERNAL   DEVELOPMENT  OF   THE 
CHURCH  IN  DOCTRINE,  CUSTOM,  AND  CONSTITUTION 

The  characteristic  Eastern  and  Western  conceptions  of 
Christianity  began  to  be  clearly  differentiated  in  the  early 
years  of  the  third  century.  A  juristic  conception  of  the 
Church  as  a  body  at  the  head  of  which,  and  clothed  with 
authority,  appeared  the  bishop  of  Rome,  had,  indeed,  be- 
come current  at  Rome  in  the  last  decade  of  the  second  cen- 
tury on  the  occasion  of  the  Easter  controversy,  which  had 
ended  in  an  estrangement  between  the  previously  closely 
affiliated  churches  of  Asia  Minor  and  the  West,  especially 
Rome  (§  38).  Western  theology  soon  became  centred  in 
North  Africa  under  the  legally  trained  Tertullian,  by  whom 
its  leading  principles  were  laid  down  in  harmony  with  the 
bent  of  the  Latin  genius  (§  39).  In  this  period  numerous 
attempts  were  made  to  solve  the  problem  arising  from  the 
unity  of  God  and  the  divinity  of  Christ,  without  recourse  to 
a  Logos  christology.  Some  of  the  more  unsuccessful  of  these 
attempts  have  since  been  grouped  under  the  heads  of  Dyna- 
mistic  and  of  Modalistic  Monarchianism  (§40).  At  the  same 
time  Montanism  was  excluded  from  the  Church  (§  41),  as 
subversive  of  the  distinction  between  the  clergy  and  laity 


i6o     CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

and  the  established  organs  of  the  Church's  government, 
which  in  the  recent  rise  of  a  theory  of  the  necessity  of  the 
episcopate  (see  above,  §  27)  had  become  important.  In  the 
administration  of  the  penitential  discipline  (§  42)  the  posi- 
tion of  the  clergy  and  the  realization  of  a  hierarchically 
organized  Church  was  still  further  advanced,  preparatory  for 
the  position  of  Cyprian.  At  the  same  time  as  these  constitu- 
tional developments  were  taking  place  in  the  West,  and 
especially  in  North  Africa,  there  occurred  in  Egypt  and 
Palestine  a  remarkable  advance  in  doctrinal  discussion, 
whereby  the  theology  of  the  apologists  was  developed  in  the 
Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria,  especially  under  the  lead- 
ership of  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Origen  (§43).  In  this 
new  speculation  a  vast  mass  of  most  fruitful  theological  ideas 
was  built  up,  from  which  subsequent  ages  drew  for  the  defence 
of  the  traditional  faith,  but  some  of  which  served  as  the  basis 
of  new  and  startling  heresies.  Corresponding  to  the  intellec- 
tual development  within  the  Church  was  the  last  phase  of 
Hellenic  philosophy,  known  as  Neo-Platonism  (§  44),  which 
subsequently  came  into  bitter  conflict  with  the  Church. 

§  38.     The  Easter  Controversy  and  the  Separation  of  Asia 

Minor  from  the  West. 
§  39.     The  Religion  of  the  West:   Its  Moral  and  Juristic 

Character. 
§  40.     The  Monarchian  Controversies. 
§  41.    Later  Montanism  and  the  Results  of  Its  Exclusion 

from  the  Church. 
§  42.     The  Penitential  Discipline. 
§  43.     The  Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria:    Clement 

and  Origen. 
§  44.    The  End  of  Ancient  Philosophy  in  Neo-Platonism. 


THE  EASTER   CONTROVERSY  i6i 


§  38.    The  Easter  Controversy  and  the  Separation  of 

THE  Churches  of  Asia  Minor  from 

THE  Western  Churches 

The  Church  grew  up  with  only  a  loose  form  of  organiza- 
tion. Each  local  congregation  was  for  a  while  autonomous, 
and  it  was  the  local  constitution  that  first  took  a  definite  and 
fixed  form.  In  the  first  centuries  local  customs  naturally  va- 
ried, and  conflicts  were  sure  to  arise  when  various  hitherto 
isolated  churches  came  into  closer  contact  and  the  sense  of 
solidarity  deepened.  The  first  clash  of  opposing  customs  oc- 
curred over  the  date  of  Easter,  as  to  which  marked  dif- 
ferences existed  between  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor,  at  that 
time  the  most  flourishing  part  of  the  Church,  and  the  churches 
of  the  West,  especially  with  the  church  of  Rome,  the  strongest 
local  church  of  all.  The  course  of  the  controversy  is  suffi- 
ciently stated  in  the  following  selection  from  Eusebius.  The 
outcome  was  the  practical  isolation  of  the  churches  of  Asia 
Minor  for  many  years.  The  controversy  was  not  settled,  and 
the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  did  not  again  play  a  prominent 
part  in  the  Church  until  the  time  of  Constantine  and  the 
Council  of  Nicaea,  325  (see  §  62,  b),  although  a  provisional  ad- 
justment of  the  difficulty,  so  far  as  the  West  was  concerned, 
took  place  shortly  before,  at  the  Council  of  Aries  (see  §  62,  a,  2). 

Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  23,  24.  (MSG,  20:489.)  Mirbt, 
n.  22,  and  in  Kirch,  n.  78  ff. 

A  brief  extract  from  the  following  may  be  found  above  in  §  3  in  a 
somewhat  different  connection. 

Ch.  23.  At  this  time  a  question  of  no  small  importance 
arose.  For  the  parishes  [i.  e.,  dioceses  in  the  later  sense  of  that 
word]  of  all  Asia,  as  from  an  older  tradition,  held  that  the 
fourteenth  day  of  the  moon,  being  the  day  on  which  the  Jews 
were  commanded  to  sacrifice  the  lamb,  should  be  observed 
as  the  feast  of  the  Saviour's  passover,  and  that  it  was  neces- 


i62      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

sary,  therefore,  to  end  their  fast  on  that  day,  on  whatever 
day  of  the  week  it  might  happen  to  fall.  It  was  not,  however, 
the  custom  of  the  churches  elsewhere  to  end  it  at  this  time, 
but  they  observed  the  practice,  which  from  apostolic  tradi- 
tion has  prevailed  to  the  present  time,  of  ending  the  fast  on 
no  other  day  than  that  of  the  resurrection  of  the  Saviour. 
Synods  and  assemblies  of  bishops  were  held  on  this  account, 
and  all  with  one  consent,  by  means  of  letters  addressed  to 
all,  drew  up  an  ecclesiastical  decree  that  the  mystery  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  Lord  from  the  dead  should  be  celebrated 
on  no  other  day  than  on  the  Lord's  Day,  and  that  we  should 
observe  the  close  of  the  paschal  fast  on  that  day  only.  There 
is  still  extant  a  writing  of  those  who  were  then  assembled 
in  Palestine,  over  whom  Theophilus,  bishop  of  the  parish  of 
Caesarea,  and  Narcissus,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  presided;  also 
another  of  those  who  were  likewise  assembled  at  Rome,  on 
account  of  the  same  question,  which  bears  the  name  of  Victor; 
also  of  the  bishops  in  Pontus,  over  whom  Palmas,  as  the 
oldest,  presided ;  and  of  the  parishes  in  Gaul,  of  which  Irenaeus 
was  bishop;  and  of  those  in  Osrhoene  and  the  cities  there; 
and  a  personal  letter  of  Bacchylus,  bishop  of  the  church  in 
Corinth,  and  of  a  great  many  others  who  uttered  one  and 
the  same  opinion  and  judgment  and  cast  the  same  vote. 
Of  these,  there  was  one  determination  of  the  question  which 
has  been  stated. 

Ch.  24.  But  the  bishops  of  Asia,  led  by  Polycrates,  decided 
to  hold  fast  to  the  customs  handed  down  to  them.  He  him- 
self, in  a  letter  addressed  to  Victor  and  the  church  of  Rome, 
set  forth  the  tradition  which  had  come  down  to  him  as  fol- 
lows: ''We  observe  the  exact  day,  neither  adding  nor  taking 
anything  away.  For  in  Asia,  also,  great  lights  have  fallen 
asleep,  which  shall  rise  again  on  the  day  of  the  Lord's  coming, 
when  He  shall  come  with  glory  from  heaven  and  shall  seek  out 
all  the  saints.  Of  these  were  Philip,  one  of  the  twelve  Apostles, 
who  fell  asleep  at  Hierapolis,  and  his  two  aged  virgin  daugh- 
ters and  his  other  daughter,  who,  having  lived  in  the  Holy 


THE  EASTER   CONTROVERSY  163 

Spirit,  rest  at  Ephesus;  and,  moreover,  John,  who  redined 
on  the  Lord's  bosom,  and  being  a  priest  wore  the  sacerdotal 
mitre,  who  was  both  a  witness  and  a  teacher;  he  fell  asleep 
at  Ephesus ;  and,  further,  Polycarp  in  Smyrna,  both  a  bishop 
and  a  martyr.  ...  All  these  observed  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  passover,  according  to  the  Gospel,  deviating  in  no  re- 
spect, but  following  the  rule  of  faith.  And  I,  Poly  crates,  do 
the  same,  the  least  of  you  all,  according  to  the  tradition  of 
my  relatives,  some  of  whom  I  have  closely  followed.  For 
seven  of  my  relatives  were  bishops,  and  I  am  the  eighth. 
And  my  relatives  always  observed  the  day  when  the  people 
put  away  the  leaven;  I,  therefore,  am  not  affrighted  by 
terrifying  words.  For  those  greater  than  I  have  said.  We 
ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  men."  .  .  .  Thereupon^  Victor, 
who  was  over  the  church  of  Rome,  immediately  attempted  to 
cut  off  from  the  common  unity  the  parishes  of  all  Asia,  with 
the  churches  that  agreed  with  them,  as  being  heterodox.  And 
he  pubHshed  letters  declaring  that  all  the  brethren  there  were 
wholly  excommunicated.  But  this  did  not  please  all  the  bish- 
ops, and  they  besought  him  to  consider  the  things  of  peace,  of 
neighborly  unity  and  love.  Words  of  theirs  are  still  extant, 
rather  sharply  rebuking  Victor.  Among  these  wxre  Irenaeus, 
who  sent  letters  in  the  name  of  the  brethren  in  Gaul,  over 
whom  he  presided,  and  maintained  that  the  mystery  of  the  res- 
urrection of  the  Lord  should  be  observed  only  on  the  Lord's 
Day,  yet  he  fittingly  admonishes  Victor  that  he  should  not 
cut  off  whole  churches  of  God  which  observed  the  tradition 
of  an  ancient  custom,  and  after  many  other  words  he  proceeds 
as  follows:  ''For  the  controversy  is  not  merely  concerning 
the  day,  but  also  concerning  the  very  manner  of  the  fast. 
For  sonie  think  that  they  should  fast  one  day,  others  two, 
yet  others  more;  some,  moreover,  count  their  days  as  con- 
sisting of  forty  hours  day  and  night.  And  this  variety  of 
observance  has  not  originated  in  our  times,  but  long  before, 
in  the  days  of  our  ancestors.    It  is  likely  that  they  did  not 

^From  here  text  in  Kirch,  nn.  84  _^. 


i64     CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

hold  to  strict  accuracy,  and  thus  was  formed  a  custom  for 
their  posterity,  according  to  their  own  simpKcity  and  their 
pecuKar  method.  Yet  all  these  lived  more  or  less  in  peace, 
and  we  also  live  in  peace  with  one  another;  and  the  dis- 
agreement in  regard  to  the  fast  confirms  the  agreement  in 
the  faith.  .  .  .  Among  these  were  the  elders  [i.  e.,  bishops  of 
earHer  date]  before  Soter,  who  presided  over  the  church 
which  thou  [Victor]  now  rulest.  We  mean  Anicetus,  and 
Pius,  and  Hyginus,  and  Telesphorus,  and  Sixtus.  They 
neither  observed  it  themselves  nor  did  they  permit  others 
after  them  to  do  so.  And  yet,  though  they  did  not  observe 
it,  they  were  none  the  less  at  peace  with  those  who  came  to 
them  from  the  parishes  in  which  it  was  observed,  although 
this  observance  was  more  opposed  to  those  who  did  not 
observe  it.  But  none  were  ever  cast  out  on  account  of  this 
form,  but  the  elders  before  thee,  who  did  not  observe  it,  sent 
the  eucharist  to  those  of  the  other  parishes  observing  it.  And 
when  the  blessed  Polycarp  was  at  Rome  in  the  time  of  Anice- 
tus, and  they  disagreed  a  Kttle  about  certain  other  things, 
they  immediately  made  peace  with  one  another,  not  caring 
to  quarrel  over  this  point.  For  neither  could  Anicetus  per- 
suade Polycarp  not  to  observe  what  he  had  always  observed 
with  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  and  the  other  Apostles 
with  whom  he  had  associated;  neither  could  Polycarp  per- 
suade Anicetus  to  observe  it,  as  he  said  that  he  ought  to  follow 
the  customs  of  the  elders  who  had  preceded  him.  But  though 
matters  were  thus,  they  nevertheless  communed  together 
and  Anicetus  granted  the  eucharist  in  the  church  to  Polycarp, 
manifestly  as  a  mark  of  respect.^  And  they  parted  from  each 
other  in  peace,  maintaining  the  peace  of  the  whole  Church, 
both  of  those  who  observed  and  those  who  did  not."  Thus 
Irenaeus,  who  was  truly  well  named,  became  a  peace-maker 
in  this  matter,  exhorting  and  negotiating  in  this  way  for  the 
peace  of  the  churches.    And  he  conferred  by  letter  about  this 

^  Probably  the  reference  is  to  the  privilege  of  celebrating  the  eucharist,  and 
not  merely  the  reception  of  the  sacrament  from  the  hands  of  Anicetus. 


THE   RELIGION  OF  THE   WEST  165 

disputed  question,  not  only  with  Victor,  but  also  with  most 
of  the  other  rulers  of  the  churches. 


§  39.    The  Religion  of  the  West  :  Its  Moral  and  Juris- 
tic Character 

In  the  writings  of  TertulHan  a  conception  of  Christianity 
is  quite  fully  developed  according  to  which  the  Gospel  was  a 
new  law  of  life,  with  its  prescribed  holy  seasons  and  hours 
for  prayer;  its  sacrifices,  though  as  yet  only  sacrifices  of 
prayer;  its  fasts  and  almsgiving,  which  had  propitiatory 
effect,  atoning  for  sins  committed  and  winning  merit  with 
God;  its  sacred  rites,  solemnly  administered  by  an  established 
hierarchy;  and  all  observed  for  the  sake  of  a  reward  which 
God  in  justice  owed  those  who  kept  His  commandments. 
It  is  noticeable  that  already  there  is  the  same  divided  opinion 
as  to  marriage,  whereby,  on  the  one  hand,  it  was  regarded  as 
a  concession  to  weakness,  a  necessary  evil,  and,  on  the  other, 
a  high  and  holy  relation,  strictly  monogamous,  and  of  abiding 
worth.  The  propitiatory  and  meritorious  character  of  fasts 
and  almsgiving  as  laid  down  by  TertulHan  was  developed 
even  further  by  Cyprian  and  became  a  permanent  element 
in  the  penitential  system  of  the  Church,  ultimately  affecting 
its  conception  of  redemption. 

(a)  TertulHan,  De  Oratione,  23,  25,  28.     (MSL,  i  :  1298.) 

Ch.  23.  As  to  kneeling,  also,  prayer  is  subject  to  diversity 
of  observance  on  account  of  a  few  who  abstain  from  kneeHng 
on  the  Sabbath.  Since  this  dissension  is  particularly  on  its 
trial  before  the  churches,  the  Lord  will  give  His  grace  that 
the  dissentients  may  either  yield  or  else  foHow  their  own 
opinion  without  offence  to  the  others.  We,  however,  as  we 
have  received,  only  on  the  Sunday  of  the  resurrection  ought 
to  guard  not  only  against  this  kneeling,  but  every  posture  and 
office  of  anxiety;  deferring  even  our  businesses,  lest  we  give 
any  place  to  the  devil.    Similarly,  too,  the  period  of  Pentecost, 


i66      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

is  a  time  which  we  distinguish  by  the  same  solemnity  of 
exultation.  But  who  would  hesitate  every  day  to  prostrate 
himself  before  God,  at  least  in  the  first  prayer  with  which  we 
enter  on  the  dayhght?  At  fasts,  moreover,  and  stations,  no 
prayer  should  be  made  without  kneehng  and  the  remaining 
customary  marks  of  humility.  For  then  we  are  not  only 
praying,  but  making  suppHcation,  and  making  satisfaction  to 
our  Lord  God. 

Ch.  25.  Touching  the  time,  however,  the  extrinsic  observ- 
ance of  certain  hours  will  not  be  unprofitable;  those  common 
hours,  I  mean,  which  mark  the  intervals  of  the  day — the 
third,  the  sixth,  the  ninth — which  we  may  find  in  Scripture 
to  have  been  more  solemn  than  the  rest. 

Ch.  28.  This  is  the  spiritual  victim  which  has  abolished 
the  pristine  sacrifices.  .  .  .  We  are  the  true  adorers  and  true 
priests,  who,  praying  in  the  spirit,  in  the  spirit  sacrifice  prayer, 
proper  and  acceptable  to  God,  which,  assuredly,  He  has 
required,  which  He  has  looked  forward  to  for  Himself.  This 
victim,  devoted  from  the  whole  heart,  fed  on  faith,  tended 
by  truth,  entire  in  innocence,  pure  in  chastity,  garlanded 
with  love  [agape],  we  ought  to  escort  with  the  pomp  of  good 
works,  amid  psalms  and  hymns,  unto  God's  altar,  to  obtain 
all  things  from  God  for  us. 

(b)  TertulHan,  De  Jejun.,  3.    (MSL,  2  :  100.) 

The  following  is  a  characteristic  statement  of  the  meritorious  and 
propitiatory  character  of  fasting.     See  below,  h,  Cyprian. 

Since  He  himself  both  commands  fasting  and  calls  a  soul 
wholly  shattered — properly,  of  course,  by  straits  of  diet — a 
sacrifice  (Psalm  51  :  18),  who  will  any  longer  doubt  that  of  all 
macerations  as  to  food  the  rationale  has  been  this :  that  by  a 
renewed  interdiction  of  food  and  observance  of  the  precept 
the  primordial  sin  might  now  be  expiated,  so  that  man  may 
make  God  satisfaction  through  the  same  causative  material 
by  which  he  offended,  that  is,  by  interdiction  of  food;  and 
so,   by  way  of  emulation,   hunger  might  rekindle,  just  as 


THE   RELIGION  OF  THE  WEST  167 

satiety  had  extinguished,  salvation,  contemning  for  the  sake 
of  one  thing  unlawful  many  things  that  are  lawful? 

(c)  Tertullian,  De  Baptismo,  17.     (MSL,  i:  1326.) 

It  remains  to  put  you  in  mind,  also,  of  the  due  observance 
of  giving  and  receiving  baptism.  The  chief  priest  {summus 
sacerdos),  who  is  the  bishop,  has  the  right  of  giving  it;  in  the 
second  place,  the  presbyters  and  deacons,  yet  not  without 
the  bishop's  authority,  on  account  of  the  honor  of  the  Church. 
When  this  has  been  preserved,  peace  is  preserved.  Besides 
these,  even  laymen  have  the  right;  for  what  is  equally 
received  can  be  equally  given.  If  there  are  no  bishops, 
priests,  or  deacons,  other  disciples  are  called.  The  word  of 
the  Lord  ought  not  to  be  hidden  away  by  any.  In  like  manner, 
also,  baptism,  which  is  equally  God's  property,  can  be  admin- 
istered by  all;  but  how  much  more  is  the  rule  of  reverence 
and  modesty  incumbent  on  laymen,  since  these  things  belong 
to  their  superiors,  lest  they  assume  to  themselves  the  specific 
functions  of  the  episcopate!  Emulation  of  the  episcopal 
office  is  the  mother  of  schism. 

{d)  Tertullian,  De  Poenitentia,  2.     (MSL,  i  :  1340.) 

How  small  is  the  gain  if  you  do  good  to  a  grateful  man,  or 
the  loss  if  to  an  ungrateful  man!  A  good  deed  has  God  as 
its  debtor,  just  as  an  evil  deed  has  Him  also;  for  the  judge 
is  a  rewarder  of  every  cause.  Now,  since  God  as  judge  pre- 
sides over  the  exacting  and  maintaining  of  justice,  which  is 
most  dear  to  Him,  and  since  it  is  for  the  sake  of  justice  that 
He  appoints  the  whole  sum  of  His  discipHne,  ought  one  to 
doubt  that,  as  in  all  our  acts  universally,  so,  also,  in  the  case 
of  repentance,  justice  must  be  rendered  to  God? 

(e)  TertulKan,  Scor place,  6.     (MSL,  2  :  157.) 

If  he  had  put  forth  faith  to  suffer  martyrdoms,  not  for  the 
contest's  sake,  but  for  its  own  benefit,  ought  it  not  to  have  had 
some  store  of  hope,  for  which  it  might  restrain  its  own  desire 


i68      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

and  suspend  its  wish,  that  it  might  strive  to  mount  up,  seeing 
that  they,  also,  who  strive  to  discharge  earthly  functions  are 
eager  for  promotion?  Or  how  will  there  be  many  mansions 
in  the  Father's  house,  if  not  for  a  diversity  of  deserts?  How, 
also,  will  one  star  differ  from  another  star  in  glory,  unless  in 
virtue  of  a  disparity  of  their  rays? 

(J)  TertulKan,  Ad  Uxorem,  I,  3;  II,  8-10.  (MSL,  i  :  1390, 
141 5.)    Cf.  Kirch,  n.  181. 

I,  3.  There  is  no  place  at  all  where  we  read  that  marriages 
are  prohibited;  of  course  as  a  ''good  thing."  What,  however, 
is  better  than  this  ''good,"  we  learn  from  the  Apostle  in  that 
he  permits  marriage,  indeed,  but  prefers  abstinence;  the 
former  on  account  of  the  insidiousness  of  temptations,  the 
latter  on  account  of  the  straits  of  the  times  (I  Cor.  7  :  26). 
Now  by  examining  the  reason  for  each  statement  it  is  easily 
seen  that  the  permission  to  marry  is  conceded  us  as  a  neces- 
sity; but  whatever  necessity  grants,  she  herself  deprecates. 
In  fact,  inasmuch  as  it  is  written,  "It  is  better  to  marry  than 
to  burn"  (I  Cor.  7:9),  what  sort  of  "good"  is  this  which  is 
only  commended  by  comparison  with  "evil,"  so  that  the 
reason  why  "marrying"  is  better  is  merely  that  "burning" 
is  worse?  Nay;  but  how  much  better  is  it  neither  to  marry 
nor  to  burn? 

II,  8.  Whence  are  we  to  find  adequate  words  to  tell  fully 
of  the  happiness  of  that  marriage  which  the  Church  cements 
and  the  oblation^  confirms,  and  the  benediction  seals;  which 
the  angels  announce,  and  the  Father  holds  for  ratified?  For 
even  on  earth  children  do  not  rightly  and  lawfully  wed  with- 
out their  father's  consent.  What  kind  of  yoke  is  that  of  two 
believers  of  one  hope,  one  discipline,  and  the  same  service? 
The  two  are  brethren,  the  two  are  fellow-servants;  no  differ- 
ence of  spirit  or  flesh;  nay,  truly,  two  in  one  flesh;  where  there 
is  one  flesh  the  spirit  is  one. 

^  Here,  as  elsewhere  in  TertulHan,  the  oblation,  or  sacrifice,  or  ofifering,  is  the 
prayers  of  the  faithful,  and  not  the  eucharist. 


THE   RELIGION  OF   THE  WEST  169 

(g)  Tertullian,  De  Monogamia,  9,  10.     (MSL,  2  :  991  /.) 

This  work  was  written  after  Tertullian  became  a  Montanist,  and 
with  other  Montanists  repudiated  second  marriage,  to  which  refer- 
ence is  made  in  both  passages.  But  the  teaching  of  the  Church  re- 
garding remarriage  after  divorce  was  as  Tertullian  here  speaks. 
The  reference  to  offering  at  the  end  of  ch.  10  does  not  refer  to  the 
eucharist,  but  to  prayers.    See  above,  Ad  Uxorem,  ch.  II,  8. 

Ch.  9.  So  far  is  it  true  that  divorce  ^'was  not  from  the 
beginning"  [cj.  Matt.  19  :  8]  that  among  the  Romans  it  is 
not  till  after  the  six  hundredth  year  after  the  foundation  of 
the  city  that  this  kind  of  hardness  of  heart  is  recorded  to 
have  been  committed.  But  they  not  only  repudiate,  but 
commit  promiscuous  adultery;  to  us,  even  if  we  do  divorce, 
it  will  not  be  lawful  to  marry. 

Ch.  10.  I  ask  the  woman  herself,  ''Tell  me,  sister,  have 
you  sent  your  husband  before  in  peace?"  What  will  she 
answer?  In  discord?  In  that  case  she  is  bound  the  more  to 
him  with  whom  she  has  a  cause  to  plead  at  the  bar  of  God. 
She  is  bound  to  another,  she  who  has  not  departed  from  him. 
But  if  she  say,  ''In  peace,"  then  she  must  necessarily  per- 
severe in  that  peace  with  him  whom  she  will  be  no  longer 
able  to  divorce;  not  that  she  would  marry,  even  if  she  had 
been  able  to  divorce  him.  Indeed,  she  prays  for  his  soul, 
and  requests  refreshment  for  him  meanwhile,  and  fellowship 
in  the  first  resurrection;  and  she  offers  on  the  anniversary 
of  his  falling  asleep. 

{h)  Cyprian,  De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis,  1,2,5.  (MSL,  4  :  625.) 

Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage  (249-258),  was  the  most  important 
theologian  and  ecclesiastic  between  Tertullian  and  Augustine.  He 
developed  the  theology  of  the  former  especially  in  its  ecclesiastical 
lines,  and  his  idea  of  the  Church  was  accepted  by  the  latter  as  a 
matter  beyond  dispute.  His  most  important  contributions  to  the 
development  of  the  Church  were  his  hierarchical  conceptions,  which 
became  generally  accepted  as  the  basis  of  the  episcopal  organization 
of  the  Church  (see  below,  §§  46,  50,  51).  His  writings,  which  are  of 
great  importance  in  the  history  of  the  Church,  consist  only  of  epistles 
and  brief  tracts.  His  influence  did  much  to  determine  the  Hues  of 
development  of  the  Western  Church,  and  especially  the  church  of 
North  Africa.    With  the  following  cf.  supra,  §  16. 


I70      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Ch.  I.  Many  and  great,  beloved  brethren,  are  the  divine 
benefits  wherewith  the  large  and  abundant  mercy  of  God 
the  Father  and  of  Christ  both  has  labored  and  is  always  labor- 
ing for  our  salvation:  because  the  Father  sent  the  Son  to  pre- 
serve us  and  give  us  life,  that  He  might  restore  us;  and  the 
Son  was  willing  to  be  sent  and  to  become  the  son  of  man,  that 
He  might  make  us  the  sons  of  God.  He  humbled  Himself 
that  He  might  raise  up  the  people  who  before  were  prostrate; 
He  was  wounded  that  He  might  heal  our  wounds;  He  served 
that  He  might  draw  to  liberty  those  who  were  in  bondage; 
He  underwent  death,  that  He  might  set  forth  immortality  to 
mortals.  These  are  many  and  great  boons  of  compassion. 
But,  moreover,  what  a  providence,  and  how  great  the  clem- 
ency, that  by  a  plan  of  salvation  it  is  provided  for  us  that 
more  abundant  care  should  be  taken  for  preserving  man 
who  has  been  redeemed!  For  when  the  Lord,  coming  to  us, 
had  cured  those  wounds  which  Adam  had  borne,  and  had 
healed  the  old  poisons  of  the  serpent,  He  gave  a  law  to  the 
sound  man,  and  bade  him  sin  no  more  lest  a  worse  thing 
should  befall  the  sinner.  We  had  been  Hmited  and  shut  up 
in  a  narrow  space  by  the  commandment  of  innocence.  Nor 
should  the  infirmity  and  weakness  of  human  frailty  have 
anything  it  might  do,  unless  the  divine  mercy,  coming  again 
in  aid,  should  open  some  way  of  securing  salvation  by  point- 
ing out  works  of  justice  and  mercy,  so  that  by  almsgiving  we 
may  wash  away  whatever  foulness  we  subsequently  contract. 

Ch.  2.  The  Holy  Spirit  speaks  in  the  sacred  Scriptures 
saying,  ^'By  almsgiving  and  faith  sins  are  purged"  [Pro v.. 
i6 :  6].  Not,  of  course,  those  sins  which  had  been  previously 
contracted,  for  these  are  purged  by  the  blood  and  sanctifi- 
cation  of  Christ.  Moreover,  He  says  again,  "As  water  ex- 
tinguishes fire,  so  almsgiving  quencheth  sin"  [Eccles.  3  :  30]. 
Here,  also,  is  shown  and  proved  that  as  by  the  laver  of  the 
saving  water  the  fire  of  Gehenna  is  extinguished,  so,  also,  by 
almsgiving  and  works  of  righteousness  the  flame  of  sin  is 
subdued.    And  because  in  baptism  remission  of  sins  is  granted 


THE  MONARCHIAN  CONTROVERSIES        171 

once  and  for  all,  constant  and  ceaseless  labor,  following  the 
likeness  of  baptism,  once  again  bestows  the  mercy  of  God.  .  .  . 
The  Lord  also  teaches  this  in  the  Gospel.  .  .  .  The  Merciful 
One  teaches  and  warns  that  works  of  mercy  be  performed; 
because  He  seeks  to  save  those  who  at  great  cost  He  has 
redeemed,  it  is  proper  that  those  who  after  the  grace  of 
baptism  have  become  foul  can  once  more  be  cleansed. 

Ch.  5.  The  remedies  for  propitiating  God  are  given  in 
the  words  of  God  himself.  The  divine  instructions  have  taught 
sinners  what  they  ought  to  do;  that  by  works  of  righteous- 
ness God  is  satisfied,  and  with  the  merits  of  mercy  sins  are 
cleansed.  ...  He  [the  angel  Raphael,  cj.  Tobit.  12:8,  9] 
shows  that  our  prayers  and  fastings  are  of  little  avail  unless 
they  are  aided  by  almsgiving;  that  entreaties  alone  are  of 
little  force  to  obtain  what  they  seek,  unless  they  be  made 
sufficient  by  the  addition  of  deeds  and  good  works.  The 
angel  reveals  and  manifests  and  certifies  that  our  petitions 
become  efiicacious  by  almsgiving,  that  Hfe  is  redeemed  from 
dangers  by  almsgiving,  that  souls  are  delivered  from  death 
by  almsgiving. 

§  40.    The  Monarchian  Controversies 

Monarchianism  is  a  general  term  used  to  include  all  the 
unsuccessful  attempts  of  teachers  within  the  Church  to  explain 
the  divine  element  in  Christ  without  doing  violence  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God,  and  yet  without  employing  the 
Logos  christology.  These  attempts  were  made  chiefly  be-  1 
tween  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century  and  the 
end  of  the  third.  They  fall  into  classes  accordingly  as 
they  regard  the  divine  element  in  Christ  as  personal  or 
impersonal.  One  class  makes  the  divine  element  to  be  an 
impersonal  power  (Greek,  dynamis)  sent  from  God  into  the 
man  Jesus;  hence  the  term  ^'Dynamistic  Monarchians." 
The  other  class  makes  the  divine  element  a  person,  without, 
however,  making  any  personal  distinction  between  Father 
and  Son,  only  a  difference  in  the  mode  in  which  the  one 


172      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

divine  person  manifests  Himself;  hence  the  term  ^'Modalistic 
Monarchians."  By  some  the  Dynamistic  Monarchians  have 
been  called  Adoptionists,  because  they  generally  taught  that 
the  man  Jesus  ultimately  became  the  Son  of  God,  not  being 
such  by  nature  but  by  ''adoption."  The  name  Adoptionist 
has  been  so  long  applied  to  a  heresy  of  the  eighth  century, 
chiefly  in  Spain,  that  it  leads  to  confusion  to  use  the  term  in 
connection  with  Monarchianism.  Furthermore,  to  speak  of 
them  as  Dynamistic  Monarchians  groups  them  with  other 
Monarchians,  which  is  desirable.  The  most  important  school 
of  Modalistic  Monarchians  was  that  of  Sabellius,  in  which 
the  Modahstic  principle  was  developed  so  as  to  include  the 
three  persons  of  the  Trinity. 

The  sources  may  be  found  collected  and  annotated  in  Hilgenfeld, 

Ketzergeschichte. 

(A)   Dynamistic  Monarchianism 

(a)  Hippolytus,  RefuL,  VII,  35,  36.     (MSG,  16  :  3342.) 

Ch.  35.  A  certain  Theodotus,  a  native  of  Byzantium, 
introduced  a  novel  heresy,  saying  some  things  concerning  the 
origin  of  the  universe  partly  in  keeping  with  the  doctrines  of 
the  true  Church,  in  so  far  as  he  admits  that  all  things  were 
created  by  God.  Forcibly  appropriating,  however,  his  idea 
of  Christ  from  the  Gnostics  and  from  Cerinthus  and  Ebion,  he 
alleges  that  He  appeared  somewhat  as  follows:  that  Jesus 
was  a  man,  born  of  a  virgin,  according  to  the  counsel  of  the 
Father,  and  that  after  He  had  lived  in  a  way  common  to  all 
men,  and  had  becom.e  pre-eminently  rehgious,  He  afterward 
at  His  baptism  in  Jordan  received  Christ,  who  came  from 
above  and  descended  upon  Him.  Therefore  miraculous  powers 
did  not  operate  within  Him  prior  to  the  manifestation  of  that 
Spirit  which  descended  and  proclaimed  Him  as  the  Christ. 
But  some  [i.  e.,  among  the  followers  of  Theodotus]  are  dis- 
posed to  think  that  this  man  never  was  God,  even  at  the 
descent  of  the  Spirit;  whereas  others  maintain  that  He  was 
made  God  after  the  resurrection  from  the  dead. 


THE   MONARCHIAN   CONTROVERSIES        173 

Ch.  36.  While,  however,  different  questions  have  arisen 
among  them,  a  certain  one  named  Theodotus,  by  trade  a 
money-changer  [to  be  distinguished  from  the  other  Theodotus, 
who  is  commonly  spoken  of  as  Theodotus,  the  leather- worker], 
attempted  to  estabhsh  the  doctrine  that  a  certain  Melchiz- 
edek  is  the  greatest  power,  and  that  this  one  is  greater  than 
Christ.  And  they  allege  that  Christ  happens  to  be  according 
to  the  likeness  of  this  one.  And  they  themselves,  similarly 
with  those  who  have  been  previously  spoken  of  as  adherents 
of  Theodotus,  assert  that  Jesus  is  a  mere  man,  and  that  in 
conformity  with  the  same  account,  Christ  descended  upon 
Him. 

(b)  The  Little  Labyrinth,  in  Eusebius,  Eist.  Ec,  V,  28. 
(MSG,  20  :5ii.) 

The  author  of  The  Little  Labyrinth,  a  work  from  which  Eusebius 
quotes  at  considerable  length,  is  uncertain.  It  has  been  attributed 
to  Hippolytus. 

The  Artemonites  say  that  all  early  teachers  and  the  Apos- 
tles themselves  received  and  taught  what  they  now  declare, 
and  that  the  truth  of  the  preaching  [i.  e.,  the  Gospel]  was 
preserved  until  the  time  of  Victor,  who  was  the  thirteenth 
bishop  in  Rome  after  Peter,  and  that  since  his  successor, 
Zephyrinus,  the  truth  has  been  corrupted.  What  they  say 
might  be  credible  if  first  of  all  the  divine  Scriptures  did  not 
contradict  them.  And  there  are  writings  of  certain  brethren 
which  are  older  than  the  times  of  Victor,  and  which  they 
wrote  in  behalf  of  the  truth  against  the  heathen  and  against 
heresies  of  their  time.  I  refer  to  Justin,  Miltiades,  Tatian, 
Clement,  and  others.  In  all  of  their  works  Christ  is  spoken 
of  as  God.  For  who  does  not  know  the  works  of  Irenaeus  and 
of  Melito  and  of  others,  which  teach  that  Christ  is  God  and 
man?  And  how  many  psalms  and  hymns,  written  by  the 
faithful  brethren  from  the  beginning,  celebrate  Christ  as  the 
Word  of  God,  speaking  of  Him  as  divine?  How,  then,  since 
the  Church's  present  opinion  has  been  preached  for  so  many 


174      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

years,  can  its  preaching  have  been  delayed,  as  they  affirm, 
until  the  times  of  Victor?  And  how  is  it  that  they  are  not 
ashamed  to  speak  thus  falsely  of  Victor,  knowing  well  that 
he  cut  off  from  communion  Theodotus,  the  leather-worker, 
the  leader  and  father  of  this  God-denying  apostasy,  and  the 
first  to  declare  that  Christ  is  mere  man. 

There  was  a  certain  confessor,  Natalius,  not  long  ago,  but 
in  our  day.  This  man  was  deceived  at  one  time  by  Asclepi- 
odotus  and  another  Theodotus,  a  certain  money-changer. 
Both  of  them  were  disciples  of  Theodotus,  the  leather- 
worker,  who,  as  I  said,  was  the  first  person  excommunicated 
by  Victor,  bishop  at  that  time,  on  account  of  this  senseless 
sentiment  or,  rather,  senselessness.  Natalius  was  persuaded 
by  them  to  allow  himself  to  be  chosen  bishop  of  this  heresy 
with  a  salary,  so  that  he  was  to  receive  from  them  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  denarii  a  month. 

They  have  treated  the  divine  Scriptures  recklessly  and 
without  fear;  they  have  set  aside  the  rule  of  ancient  faith; 
and  Christ  they  have  not  known,  not  endeavoring  to  learn 
what  the  divine  Scriptures  declare,  but  striving  laboriously 
after  any  form  of  syllogism  which  may  be  found  to  suit  their 
impiety.  And  if  any  one  brings  before  them  a  passage  of 
divine  Scripture,  they  see  whether  a  conjunctive  or  a  dis- 
junctive form  of  syllogism  can  be  made  from  it.  And  as 
being  of  the  earth  and  speaking  of  the  earth  and  as  ignorant 
of  Him  that  cometh  from  above,  they  devote  themselves  to 
geometry  and  forsake  the  holy  writings  of  God.  Euclid  is 
at  least  laboriously  measured  by  some  of  them;  Aristotle 
and  Theophrastus  admired;  and  Galen,  perhaps,  by  some  is 
even  worshipped.  But  that  those  who  use  the  arts  of  un- 
believers for  their  heretical  opinion  and  adulterate  the  simple 
faith  of  the  divine  Scriptures  by  the  craft  of  the  godless  are 
not  near  the  faith,  what  need  is  there  to  say?  Therefore,  they 
have  laid  their  hands  boldly  upon  the  divine  Scriptures, 
alleging  that  they  have  corrected  them.  That  I  am  not 
speaking  falsely  of  them  in  this  matter,  whoever  wishes  can 


THE  MONARCHIAN  CONTROVERSIES        175 

learn.  For  if  any  one  will  collect  their  respective  copies  and 
compare  them  with  one  another,  he  will  find  that  they  differ 
greatly. 

(B)   Modalistic  Monarchianism 

Additional  source  material:  Hippolytus,  Adversus  Noetum,  RefutatiOj 
IX,  J  ff.,  X,  27;  Tertullian,  Adversus  Praxean;  Basil,  Ep.  207,  210. 
(PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  VIII.) 

(a)  Hippolytus,  Refut.,  X,  27.    (MSG,  16  :  3440.) 

The  following  passages  from  the  great  work  of  Hippolytus  give 
the  earlier  form  of  Modalistic  Monarchianism.  They  are  also  of 
importance  as  being  a  part  of  the  foundation  for  the  statement  of 
Harnack  and  others,  that  this  heresy  was  the  official  Roman  doctrine 
for  some  years.  See  also  IX,  12,  of  which  the  text  may  be  found  in 
Kirch,  nn.  201-206.  The  whole  question  as  to  the  position  of  Cal- 
listus,  or  Calixtus,  as  bishop  of  Rome  and  his  relations  to  the  Church 
as  a  whole  is  difficult  and  full  of  obscurity,  due  to  a  large  extent  to 
the  fact  that  the  principal  source  for  his  history  is  the  work  of  Hip- 
polytus, who,  as  may  easily  be  seen,  was  bitterly  opposed  to  him. 

Noetus,  a  Smyrnaean  by  birth,  a  reckless  babbler  and  trick- 
ster, introduced  this  heresy,  which  originated  with  Epigonus, 
and  was  adopted  by  Cleomenes,  and  has  thus  continued  to 
this  day  among  his  successors.  Noetus  asserts  that  there  is 
one  Father  and  God  of  the  universe,  and  that  He  who  had 
made  all  things  was,  when  He  wished,  invisible  to  those  who 
existed,  and  when  He  wished  He  became  visible;  that  He  is 
invisible  when  He  is  not  seen  and  visible  when  He  is  seen; 
that  the  Father  is  unbegotten  when  He  is  not  generated, 
but  begotten  when  He  is  born  of  a  virgin;  that  He  is  not 
subject  to  suffering  and  is  immortal  when  He  does  not  suffer 
and  die,  but  when  His  passion  came  upon  Him  Noetus 
admits  that  the  Father  suffers  and  dies.  The  Noetians  think 
that  the  Father  is  called  the  Son  according  to  events  at 
different  times. 

Callistus  supported  the  heresy  of  these  Noetians,  but  we 
have  carefully  described  his  life  [see  above,  §  19,  c].  And 
Callistus    himself   likewise   produced    a   heresy,    taking   his 


176      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

starting-point  from  these  Noetians.  And  he  acknowledges 
that  there  is  one  Father  and  God,  and  that  He  is  the  Creator 
of  the  universe,  and  that  He  is  called  and  regarded  as  Son  by 
name,  yet  that  in  substance  He  is  one.^  For  the  Spirit  as  Deity 
is  not,  he  says,  any  being  different  from  the  Logos,  or  the 
Logos;  from  Deity;  therefore,  this  one  person  is  divided  by 
name,  but  not  according  to  substance.  He  supposes  this 
one  Logos  to  be  God  and  he  says  that  He  became  flesh.  He 
is  disposed  to  maintain  that  He  who  was  seen  in  the  flesh  and 
crucified  is  Son,  but  it  is  the  Father  who  dwells  in  Him. 

(b)  Hippolytus,  RefuL,  IX,  7,  11  /.    (MSG,  16  :  3369.) 

Ch.  7.  There  has  appeared  a  certain  one,  Noetus  by  name, 
by  birth  a  Smyrnaean.  This  person  introduced  from  the  ten- 
ets of  Heraclitus  a  heresy.  Now  a  certain  Epigonus  became 
his  minister  and  pupil,  and  this  person  during  his  sojourn  in 
Rome  spread  his  godless  opinion.  .  .  .  But  Zephyrinus  him- 
self was  in  course  of  time  enticed  away  and  hurried  headlong 
into  the  same  opinion;  and  he  had  CalHstus  as  his  adviser 
and  fellow-champion  of  these  wicked  tenets.  .  .  .  The  school 
of  these  heretics  continued  in  a  succession  of  teachers  to 
acquire  strength  and  to  grow  because  Zephyrinus  and  CaUistus 
helped  them  to  prevail. 

Ch.  II.  Now  that  Noetus  affirms  that  the  Son  and  the 
Father  are  the  same,  no  one  is  ignorant.  But  he  makes  a 
statement  as  follows:  "When,  indeed,  at  the  time  the  Father 
was  not  yet  born.  He  was  justly  styled  the  Father;  and  when 
it  pleased  Him  to  undergo  generation  and  to  be  begotten,  He 
himself  became  His  own  Son,  not  another's."  For  in  this 
manner  he  thinks  he  estabhshes  the  Monarchy,  alleging  that 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  so  called,  are  not  from  one  another, 
but  are  one  and  the  same,  Himself  from  Himself,  and  that  He 
is  styled  by  the  names  Father  and  Son,  according  to  the 
changes  of  times. 

^The  word  substance  as  used  here  in  connection  with  the  nature  of  the 
Trinity  has  not  taken  its  later  meaning  and  use. 


THE  MONARCHIAN  CONTROVERSIES        177 

Ch.  12.  Now  Callistus  brought  forward  Zephyrinus  himself 
and  induced  him  to  avow  publicly  the  following  opinions: 
''I  know  that  there  is  one  God,  Jesus  Christ;  and  that  ex- 
cepting Him  I  do  not  know  another  begotten  and  capable 
of  suffering."  When  he  said,  *'The  Father  did  not  die  but 
the  Son,"  he  would  in  this  way  continue  to  keep  up  cease- 
less disturbance  among  the  people.  And  we  [i.  e.,  Hippol- 
ytus],  becoming  aware  of  his  opinions,  did  not  give  place 
to  him,  but  reproved  him  and  withstood  him  for  the  truth's 
sake.  He  rushed  into  folly  because  all  consented  to  his  hypoc- 
risy; we,  however,  did  not  do  so,  and  he  called  us  wor- 
shippers of  two  gods,  disgorging  freely  the  venom  lurking 
within  him. 

(c)  Hippolytus,  Adversus  Noetum.     (MSG,  10  :  804.) 

The  following  is  from  a  fragment  which  seems  to  be  the  conclusion 
of  an  extended  work  against  various  heresies. 

Some  others  are  secretly  introducing  another  doctrine  who 
have  become  the  disciples  of  a  certain  Noetus,  who  was  a 
native  of  Smyrna,  and  lived  not  very  long  ago.  This  man 
was  greatly  puffed  up  with  pride,  being  inspired  by  the  con- 
ceit of  a  strange  spirit.  He  alleged  that  Christ  was  the  Father 
himself,  and  that  the  Father  himself  was  born  and  suffered 
and  died.  .  .  .  When  the  blessed  presbyters  heard  these 
things  they  summoned  him  before  the  Church  and  examined 
him.  But  he  denied  at  first  that  he  held  such  opinions. 
Afterward,  taking  shelter  among  some  and  gathering  round 
him  some  others  who  had  been  deceived  in  the  same  way, 
he  wished  to  maintain  his  doctrine  openly.  And  the  blessed 
presbyters  summoned  him  and  examined  him.  But  he 
resisted,  saying,  ''What  evil,  then,  do  I  commit  when  I 
glorify  Christ?"  And  the  presbyters  replied  to  him,  ''We, 
too,  know  in  truth  one  God;  we  know  Christ;  we  know 
that  the  Son  suffered  even  as  He  suffered,  and  died  even  as 
He  died,  and  rose  again  on  the  third  day,  and  is  at  the  right 
hand  of  the  Father,  and  cometh  to  judge  the  living  and  the 


178      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

dead.  And  these  things  which  we  have  learned  we  assert." 
Then,  after  refuting  him,  they  expelled  him  from  the  Church. 
And  he  was  carried  to  such  a  pitch  of  pride  that  he  established 
a  school. 

Now  they  seek  to  exhibit  the  foundation  of  their  dogma, 
alleging  that  it  is  said  in  the  Law,  ''I  am  the  God  of  your 
fathers;  ye  shall  have  no  other  gods  beside  me"  [i.  e.,  of  Moses, 
cf.  Ex.  3:6,  13;  20:3];  and  again  in  another  passage,  "I 
am  the  first  and  the  last  and  besides  me  there  is  none  other" 
[cf.  Is.  44 :  6].  Thus  they  assert  that  God  is  one.  And  then 
they  answer  in  this  manner:  ''If  therefore  I  acknowledge 
Christ  to  be  God,  He  is  the  Father  himself,  if  He  is  indeed 
God;  and  Christ  suffered,  being  Himself  God,  and  consequently 
the  Father  suffered,  for  He  was  the  Father  himself." 

(d)  Tertullian,  Adv.  Praxean,  i,  2,  27,  29.  (MSL,  2  :  177/., 
214.) 

Tertullian  is  especially  bitter  against  Praxeas,  because  he  prevented 
the  recognition  of  the  Montanists  at  Rome  when  it  seemed  likely  that 
they  would  be  treated  favorably.  The  work  Adversus  Praxean  is 
the  most  important  work  of  Western  theology  on  the  Trinity  before 
the  time  of  Augustine.  It  was  corrected  in  some  important  points  by 
Novatian,  but  its  clear  formulae  remained  in  Western  theology  per- 
manently. The  work  belongs  to  the  late  Montanistic  period  of  Ter- 
tullian. 

Ch.  I.  In  various  ways  has  the  devil  rivalled  the  truth. 
Sometimes  his  aim  has  been  to  destroy  it  by  defending  it. 
He  maintains  that  there  is  one  only  Lord,  the  Almighty 
Creator  of  the  world,  that  of  this  doctrine  of  the  unity  he 
may  fabricate  a  heresy.  He  says  that  the  Father  himself 
came  down  into  the  Virgin,  was  Himself  born  of  her,  Himself 
suffered,  indeed,  was  Himself  Jesus  Christ.  ...  He  [Praxeas] 
was  the  first  to  import  into  Rome  this  sort  of  perversity,  a 
man  of  restless  disposition  in  other  respects,  and  above  all 
inflated  with  the  pride  of  martyrdom  [confessorship]  simply 
and  solely  because  of  a  short  annoyance  in  prison;  when, 
even  if  he  had  given  his  body  to  be  burned,  it  would  have 


THE  MONARCHIAN   CONTROVERSIES        179 

profited  him  nothing,  not  having  the  love  of  God,  whose 
very  gifts  he  resisted  and  destroyed.  For  after  the  Bishop 
of  Rome  had  acknowledged  the  prophetic  gifts  of  Monta- 
nus,  Priscilla,  and  Maximilla,  and  in  consequence  of  the  ac- 
knowledgment had  bestowed  his  peace  on  the  churches  of 
Asia  and  Phrygia,  Praxeas,  by  importunately  urging  false 
accusations  against  the  prophets  themselves  and  their  churches, 
and  insisting  on  the  authority  of  the  bishop's  predecessors  in 
the  see,  compelled  him  to  recall  the  letter  of  peace  which  he 
had  issued,  as  well  as  to  desist  from  his  purpose  of  acknowl- 
edging the  said  gifts.  Thus  Praxeas  did  two  pieces  of  the 
devil's  work  in  Rome :  he  drove  out  prophecy  and  he  brought 
in  heresy;  he  put  to  flight  the  Paraclete  and  he  crucified 
the  Father. 

Ch.  2.  After  a  time,  then,  the  Father  was  born,  and  the 
Father  suffered — God  himself,  the  Almighty,  is  preached  as 
Jesus  Christ. 

Ch.  27.  For,  confuted  on  all  sides  by  the  distinction  between 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  which  we  make  while  their  insep- 
arable union  remains  as  [by  the  examples]  of  the  sun  and  the 
ray,  and  the  fountain  and  the  river — yet  by  help  of  their  con- 
ceit of  an  indivisible  number  [with  issues]  of  two  and  three, 
they  endeavor  to  interpret  this  distinction  in  a  way  which  shall 
nevertheless  agree  with  their  own  opinions;  so  that,  all  in  one 
person,  they  distinguish  two — Father  and  Son — understanding 
the  Son  to  be  the  flesh,  that  is  the  man,  that  is  Jesus;  and 
the  Father  to  be  the  Spirit,  that  is  God,  that  is  Christ. 

Ch.  29.  Since  we^  teach  in  precisely  the  same  terms  that 
the  Father  died  as  you  say  the  Son  died,  we  are  not  guilty 
of  blasphemy  against  the  Lord  God,  for  we  do  not  say  that 
He  died  after  the  divine  nature,  but  only  after  the  human.  .  .  . 
They  [the  heretics],  indeed,  fearing  to  incur  blasphemy  against 
the  Father,  hope  to  diminish  it  in  this  way,  admitting  that 
the  Father  and  the  Son  are  two;  but  if  the  Son,  indeed, 
suffers,  the  Father  is  His  fellow-sufferer. 

*/.  e.,  the  followers  of  Praxeas,  who  are  here  introduced  as  speaking. 


i8o      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

(e)  Formula  Macrostichos,  in  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  19. 
(MSG,  67  :  229.) 

In  the  Arian  controversy  several  councils  were  held  at  Antioch  in 
the  endeavor  to  bring  about  a  reconciliation  of  the  parties.  At  the 
third  council  of  Antioch,  A.  D.  345,  the  elaborate  Formula  Macro- 
stichos was  put  forth,  in  which  the  council  attempted  to  steer  a  middle 
course  between  the  Sabellians,  who  identified  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
and  the  extreme  Arians,  who  made  the  Son  a  creature. 

Text  may  also  be  found  in  Hahn,  op.  ciL,  §  159. 

Those  who  say  that  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  are 
the  same  person,  impiously  understanding  the  three  names 
to  refer  to  one  and  the  same  person,  we  expel  with  good 
reason  from  the  Church,  because  by  the  incarnation  they 
subject  the  Father,  who  is  infinite  and  incapable  of  suffer- 
ing, to  finitude  and  suffering  in  the  incarnation.  Such  are 
those  called  Patripassianists  by  the  Romans  and  SabeUians 
by  us. 

(/)  Athanasius,  Orationes  contra  Arianos,  IV,  9,  25.  (MSG, 
26  :  480,  505.) 

For  Athanasius,  v.  infra,  §  65,  c.  Of  the  four  Orations  against  the 
Arians,  attributed  to  Athanasius  and  placed  between  the  years  356 
and  362,  doubts  have  been  raised  against  the  genuineness  of  the  fourth. 
The  following  quotations  are,  in  any  case,  valuable  as  setting  forth 
the  Sabellian  position.  But  the  case  against  the  fourth  oration  has 
not  been  conclusively  proved.  In  the  passage  from  ch.  25  the  statement 
is  that  of  the  Sabellians,  not  of  Athanasius. 

Ch.  9.  If,  again,  the  One  have  two  names,  this  is  the  expe- 
dient of  Sabellius,  who  said  that  Son  and  Father  were  the 
same  and  did  away  with  both,  the  Father  when  there  is  a 
Son,  and  the  Son  when  there  is  a  Father.  .  .  . 

Ch.  25.  ''As  there  are  diversities  of  gifts  but  the  same 
Spirit,  so  also  the  Father  is  the  same,  but  is  dilated  into  Son 
and  Spirit." 

(g)  Athanasius,  Expositio  fidei.     (MSG,  25  :  204.) 

For  the  critical  questions  regarding  this  little  work  of  uncertain  date 
see  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  VI,  p.  83. 


LATER  MONTANISM 


i«i 


For  neither  do  we  hold  a  Son-father,  as  do  the  SabelHans, 
calHng  Him  of  one  but  not  of  the  same  essence,  and  thus 
destroying  the  existence  of  the  Son. 

Qi)  Basil  the  Great,  Epistula  210  :  3.  (MSG,  32  :  772, 
776.) 

Basil  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  was  one  of  the 
more  important  ecclesiastics  of  the  fourth  century,  and  the  leader  of 
the  New-Nicene  party  in  the  Arian  controversy.     V.  infra,  §  66,  e. 

Sabellianism  is  Judaism  imported  into  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  under  the  guise  of  Christianity.  For  if  a  man 
calls  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  one,  but  manifold  as  to 
person  [prosopon],  and  makes  one  hypostasis  of  the  three, 
what  else  does  he  do  than  deny  the  everlasting  pre-existence 
of  the  Only  begotten?  .  .  . 

Now  Sabellius  did  not  even  deprecate  the  formation  of  the 
persons  without  the  hypostasis,  saying,  as  he  did,  that  the 
same  God,  being  one  in  substance,^  was  metamorphosed  as 
the  need  of  the  moment  required  and  spoken  of  now  as  Father, 
now  as  the  Son,  and  now  as  Holy  Spirit. 

§41.    Later  Montanism  and  the  Consequences  of  its 
Exclusion  from  the  Church 

In  the  West  Montanism  rapidly  discarded  the  extravagant 
chiHasm  of  Montanus  and  his  immediate  followers;  it  laid 
nearly  all  the  stress  upon  the  continued  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
in  the  Church  and  the  need  of  a  stricter  moral  discipline  among 
Christians.  This  rigoristic  discipHne  or  morality  was  not  ac- 
ceptable to  the  bulk  of  Christians,  and  along  with  the  Mon- 
tanists  was  driven  out  of  the  Church,  except  in  the  case  of  the 
clergy,  to  whom  a  stricter  morahty  was  regarded  as  appli- 
cable. In  this  way  a  distinctive  morality  and  mode  of  Hfe 
came  to  be  assigned  to  the  clergy,  and  the  separation  between 
clergy  and  laity,   or  ordo  and  plehs,   which   was  becoming 

^  Not  ouaiq.,  but  uxoxet[J.iv(p. 


i82      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

established  about  the  time  of  Tertullian,  at  least  in  the  West, 
was  permanently  fixed.    (See  §  42,  d.) 

Tertullian,  De  Exhortatione  Castitatis,  7.    (MSL,  2  :  971.) 

As  a  Montanist,  Tertullian  rejected  second  marriage,  and  in  this  trea- 
tise, addressed  to  a  friend  who  had  recently  lost  his  wife,  he  treated 
it  as  the  foulest  adultery.  This  work  belongs  to  the  later  years  of 
TertuUian's  life  and  incidentally  reveals  that  a  sharp  distinction  be- 
tween clergy  and  laity  was  becoming  fixed  in  the  main  body  of  the 
Church. 

We  should  be  foolish  if  we  thought  that  what  is  unlawful 
for  priests^  is  lawful  for  laics.  Are  not  even  we  laics  priests? 
It  is  written:  *^He  has  made  us  kings  also,  and  priests  to 
God  and  his  Father."  The  authority  of  the  Church  has  made 
the  difference  between  order  [ordinem]  and  the  laity  [plebem], 
and  the  honor  has  been  sanctified  by  the  bestowal  of  the 
order.  Therefore,  where  there  has  been  no  bestowal  of 
ecclesiastical  order,  you  both  offer  and  baptize  and  are  a 
priest  to  yourself  alone.  But  where  there  are  three,  there  is 
the  Church,  though  they  are  laics.  .  .  .  Therefore,  if,  when 
there  is  necessity,  you  have  the  right  of  a  priest  in  yourself, 
you  ought  also  to  have  the  discipline  of  a  priest  where  there 
is  necessity  that  you  have  the  right  of  a  priest.  As  a  digamist,^ 
do  you  baptize?  As  a  digamist,  do  you  offer?  How  much 
more  capital  a  crime  it  is  for  a  digamist  laic  to  act  as  a  priest, 
when  the  priest,  if  he  turn  digamist,  is  deprived  of  the  power 
of  acting  as  a  priest?  .  .  .  God  wills  that  at  all  times  we  be 
so  conditioned  as  to  be  fitted  at  all  times  and  in  all  places  to 
undertake  His  sacraments.  There  is  one  God,  one  faith,  one 
discipline  as  well.  So  truly  is  this  the  case  that  unless  the 
laics  well  observe  the  rules  which  are  to  guide  the  choice  of 
presbyters,  how  will  there  be  presbyters  at  all  who  are  chosen 
from  among  the  laics? 

*  Sacerdotes,  and  so  throughout. 

2  A  person  married  a  second  time,  i.  e.,  after  the  death  of  his  first  wife. 


THE  PENITENTIAL  DISCIPLINE  183 


§  42.    The  Penitential  Discipline 

In  baptism  the  convert  received  remission  of  all  former 
sins,  and,  what  was  equivalent,  admission  to  the  Church. 
If  he  sinned  gravely  after  baptism,  could  he  again  obtain 
remission?  In  the  first  age  of  the  Church  the  practice  as 
to  this  question  inclined  toward  rigorism,  and  the  man  who 
sinned  after  baptism  was  in  many  places  permanently  ex- 
cluded from  the  Church  {cj.  Heb.  10  :  26,  27),  or  the  com- 
munity of  those  whose  sins  had  been  forgiven  and  were 
certain  of  heaven.  By  the  middle  of  the  second  century  the 
practice  at  Rome  tended  toward  permitting  one  readmission 
after  suitable  penance  (a).  After  this  the  penitential  disci- 
pline developed  rapidly  and  became  an  important  part  of  the 
business  of  the  local  congregation  {h).  The  sinner,  by  a  long 
course  of  self-mortification  and  prayer,  obtained  the  desired 
readmission  (c).  The  Montanists,  however,  in  accord  with 
their  general  rigorism,  would  make  it  extremely  hard,  if  not 
impossible,  to  obtain  readmission  or  forgiveness.  The  body 
of  the  Church,  and  certainly  the  Roman  church  under  the 
lead  of  its  bishop,  who  relied  upon  Matt.  16  :  18,  adopted  a 
more  liberal  policy  and  granted  forgiveness  on  relatively  easy 
terms  to  even  the  worst  offenders  {d).  The  discipline  grew 
less  severe,  because  martyrs  or  confessors,  according  to  Matt. 
10  :  20,  were  regarded  as  having  the  Spirit,  and  there- 
fore competent  to  speak  for  God  and  announce  the  divine 
forgiveness.  These  were  accustomed  to  give  ''letters  of  peace, " 
which  were  commonly  regarded  as  sufficient  to  procure  the 
immediate  readmission  of  the  offender  (g),  a  practice  which 
led  to  great  abuse.  One  of  the  effects  of  the  development 
of  the  penitential  discipKne  was  the  establishment  of  a  dis- 
tinction between  mortal  and  venial  sins  (/),  the  former  of 
which  were,  in  general,  acts  involving  unchastity,  shedding  of 
blood,  and  apostasy,  according  to  the  current  interpretation 
of  Acts  15  :  29. 


i84      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

(a)  Hernias,  Pastor,  Man.  IV,  3:1. 
For  Hermas  and  the  Pastor,  v.  supra,  §  15. 

I  heard  some  teachers  maintain,  sir,  that  there  is  no  other 
repentance  than  that  which  takes  place  when  we  descend 
into  the  waters  and  receive  remission  of  our  former  sins. 
He  said  to  me.  That  was  sound  doctrine  which  you  heard; 
for  that  is  really  the  case.  For  he  who  has  received  remission 
of  his  sins  ought  not  to  sin  any  more,  but  to  live  in  purity.  .  .  . 
The  Lord,  therefore,  being  merciful,  has  had  mercy  on  the 
work  of  His  hands,  and  has  set  repentance  for  them;  and  He 
has  intrusted  to  me  the  power  over  this  repentance.  And 
therefore  I  say  unto  you  that  if  any  one  is  tempted  by  the 
devil,  and  sins  after  that  great  and  holy  calling  in  which  the 
Lord  has  called  His  people  to  everlasting  life,  he  has  oppor- 
tunity to  repent  but  once.  But  if  he  should  sin  frequently 
after  this,  and  then  repent,  to  such  a  man  his  repentance  will 
be  of  no  avail,  for  with  difficulty  will  he  live. 

(b)  Tertullian.    Apology,  39.     (MSL,  i  :  532.) 

We  meet  together  as  an  assembly  and  congregation  that, 
offering  up  prayer  to  God,  with  united  force  we  may  wrestle 
with  Him  in  our  prayers.  ...  In  the  same  place,  also, 
exhortations  are  made,  rebukes  and  sacred  censures  are  admin- 
istered. For  with  a  great  gravity  is  the  work  of  judging 
carried  on  among  us,  as  befits  those  who  feel  assured  that 
they  are  in  the  sight  of  God ;  and  you  have  the  most  notable 
example  of  judgment  to  come  when  any  one  has  so  sinned 
as  to  be  severed  from  common  union  with  us  in  prayer,  in 
the  congregation,  and  in  all  sacred  intercourse. 

(c)  TertulHan,  De  Poenitentia,  4,  9.     (MSL,  2  :  1343,  1354-) 

According  to  Bardenhewer,  §  50  :  5,  this  work  belongs  to  the  Cath- 
olic period  of  TertuHian's  literary  activity.  Text  in  part  in  Kirch, 
nn.  175  /. 

Ch.  4.  As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,  I  prefer  penance  rather 
than  death  [cf.  Ezek.  33  :  11].     Repentance,   then,   is  life, 


THE  PENITENTIAL  DISCIPLINE  185 

since  it  is  preferred  to  death.  That  repentance,  0  sinner 
like  myself  (nay,  rather,  less  a  sinner  than  myself,  for  I 
acknowledge  my  pre-eminence  in  sins),  do  you  hasten  to  em- 
brace as  a  shipwrecked  man  embraces  the  protection  of  some 
plank.  This  will  draw  you  forth  when  sunk  in  the  waves 
of  sin,  and  it  will  bear  you  forward  into  the  port  of  divine 
clemency. 

Ch.  9.  The  narrower  the  sphere  of  action  of  this,  the  sec- 
ond and  only  remaining  repentance,  the  more  laborious  is 
its  probation;  that  it  may  not  be  exhibited  in  the  conscience 
alone,  but  may  Ukewise  be  performed  in  some  act.  This  act, 
which  is  more  usually  expressed  and  commonly  spoken  of 
under  the  Greek  name,  exomologesis,  whereby  we  confess  our 
sins  to  the  Lord,  not  indeed  to  Him  as  ignorant  of  them, 
but  inasmuch  as  by  confession  a  satisfaction  is  made;  of  con- 
fession repentance  is  born;  by  repentance  God  is  appeased. 
And  thus  exomologesis  is  a  discipKne  for  man's  prostration  and 
humiliation,  enjoining  a  demeanor  calculated  to  move  mercy. 
With  regard,  also,  to  the  very  dress  and  food,  it  commands 
one  to  lie  in  sackcloth  and  ashes,  to  cover  the  body  as  in 
mourning,  to  lay  the  spirit  low  in  sorrow,  to  exchange  for 
severe  treatment  the  sins  which  he  has  committed;  further- 
more, to  permit  as  food  and  drink  only  what  is  plain — not 
for  the  stomach's  sake,  but  for  the  soul's;  for  the  most  part, 
however,  to  feed  prayers  on  fastings,  to  groan,  to  weep,  and 
make  outcries  unto  the  Lord  our  God;  to  fall  prostrate 
before  the  presbyters  and  to  kneel  to  God's  dear  ones;  to 
enjoin  on  all  the  brethren  to  be  ambassadors  to  bear  his 
deprecatory  supplication  before  God.  All  this  exomologesis 
does,  that  it  may  enhance  repentance,  that  it  may  honor  the 
Lord  by  fear  of  danger,  may,  by  itself,  in  pronouncing  against 
the  sinner  stand  in  place  of  God's  indignation,  and  by  tem- 
poral mortification  (I  will  not  say  frustrate,  but  rather) 
expunge  eternal  punishments.  i 

{d)  Tertullian,  De  Pudicitia,  i,  21,  22.  (MSL,  2  :  1032, 
1078.) 


i86      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Callistus,  to  whom  reference  is  made  in  the  first  chapter,  was  bishop 
of  Rome  217  to  222.  The  work,  therefore,  belongs  to  the  latest  period 
of  Tertullian's  life. 

Ch.  I.  I  hear  that  there  has  been  an  edict  set  forth,  and, 
indeed,  a  peremptory  one;  namely,  that  the  Pontifex  Maximus, 
the  bishop  of  bishops,  issues  an  edict:  ''I  remit  to  such  as 
have  performed  penance,  the  sins  both  of  adultery  and  for- 
nication." 

Ch.  21.  ''But,"  you  say,  ''the  Church  has  the  power  of 
forgiving  sins."  This  I  acknowledge  and  adjudge  more,  I, 
who  have  the  Paraclete  himself  in  the  person  of  the  new 
prophets,  saying:  "The  Church  has  the  power  to  forgive 
sins,  but  I  will  not  do  it,  lest  they  commit  still  others."  .  .  . 
I  now  inquire  into  your  opinion,  to  discover  from  what 
source  you  usurp  this  power  to  the  Church. 

If,  because  the  Lord  said  to  Peter,  "Upon  this  rock  I  will 
build  My  Church  [Matt.  16  :  18]  .  .  .  To  Thee  I  have  given 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  or  "Whatsoever  thou 
shalt  bind  or  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  or  loosed  in 
heaven,"  you  therefore  presume  that  the  power  of  binding 
and  loosing  has  descended  to  you,  that  is,  to  every  church 
akin  to  Peter;  what  sort  of  man,  then,  are  you,  subverting 
and  wholly  changing  the  manifest  intention  of  the  Lord,  who 
conferred  the  gift  personally  upon  Peter?  "On  Thee,"  He 
says,  "I  will  build  my  Church,"  and  "I  will  give  thee  the 
keys,"  not  to  the  Church;  and  "whatsoever  thou  shalt 
have  loosed  or  bound,"  not  what  they  shall  have  loosed  or 
bound.  For  so  the  result  actually  teaches.  In  him  (Peter) 
the  Church  was  reared,  that  is,  through  him  (Peter)  himself; 
he  himself  tried  the  key;  you  see  what  key:  " Men  of  Israel,  let 
what  I  say  sink  into  your  ears;  Jesus,  the  Nazarene,  a  man 
appointed  of  God  for  you,"^  and  so  forth.  Peter  himself, 
therefore,  was  the  first  to  unbar,  in  Christ's  baptism,  the 
entrance  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  in  which  are  loosed  the 
sins  that  aforetime  were  bound.  .  .  . 

^CJ.  Acts  2  :  22. 


THE   PENITENTIAL  DISCIPLINE  187 

What,  now,  has  this  to  do  with  the  Church  and  your 
Church,  indeed,  O  Psychic?  For  in  accordance  with  the  per- 
son of  Peter,  it  is  to  spiritual  men  that  this  power  will  corre- 
spondingly belong,  either  to  an  Apostle  or  else  to  a  prophet. 
.  .  .  And  accordingly  the  "Church,"  it  is  true,  will  forgive 
sins;  but  it  will  be  the  Church  of  the  Spirit,  by  a  spiritual 
man;  not  the  Church  which  consists  of  a  number  of  bishops. 

Ch.  22.  But  you  go  so  far  as  to  lavish  this  power  upon 
martyrs  indeed;  so  that  no  sooner  has  any  one,  acting  on  a 
preconceived  arrangement,  put  on  soft  bonds  in  the  nominal 
custody  now  in  vogue,  than  adulterers  beset  him,  fornicators 
gain  access  to  him;  instantly  prayers  resound  about  him; 
instantly  pools  of  tears  of  the  polluted  surround  him ;  nor  are 
there  any  who  are  more  diligent  in  purchasing  entrance  to  the 
prison  than  they  who  have  lost  the  fellowship  of  the  Church. 
.  .  .  Whatever  authority,  whatever  reason,  restores  ecclesi- 
astical peace  to  the  adulterer  and  the  fornicator,  the  same 
will  be  bound  to  come  to  the  aid  of  the  murderer  and  the 
idolater  in  their  repentance. 

{e)  Tertullian,  Ad  Martyres,  i.    (MSL,  i  :  693.) 

The  following  extract  from  Tertullian's  little  work  addressed  to 
martyrs  in  prison,  written  about  197,  shows  that  in  his  earlier  Hfe  as 
a  Catholic  Christian  he  did  not  disapprove  of  the  practice  of  giving 
libelli  pacts  by  the  confessors,  a  custom  which  in  his  more  rigoristic 
period  under  the  influence  of  Montanism  he  denounced  most  vehe- 
mently; see  preceding  extract  from  De  Pudicitia,  ch.  22.  The  reference 
to  some  discord  among  the  martyrs  is  not  elsewhere  explained.  For 
lihelli  pads,  see  Cyprian,  Ep.  10  {  =  Ep.  15),  22  (  =  21). 

0  blessed  ones,  grieve  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  has  entered 
with  you  into  the  prison;  for  if  He  had  not  gone  with  you 
there,  you  would  not  be  there  to-day.  Therefore  endeavor 
to  cause  Him  to  remain  with  you  there;  so  that  He  may  lead 
you  thence  to  the  Lord.  The  prison,  truly,  is  the  devil's 
house  as  well,  wherein  he  keeps  his  family.  .  .  .  Let  him 
not  be  successful  in  his  own  kingdom  by  setting  you  at 
variance  with  one  another,  but  let  him  find  you  armed  and 


i88      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

fortified  with  concord;  for  your  peace  is  war  with  him. 
Some,  not  able  to  find  peace  in  the  Church,  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  seek  it  from  the  imprisoned  martyrs.  Therefore 
you  ought  to  have  it  dwelling  with  you,  and  to  cherish  it  and 
guard  it,  that  you  may  be  able,  perchance,  to  bestow  it  upon 
others. 

(f)  Tertullian,  De  Pudicitia,  19.    (MSL,  2  :  1073.) 

The  distinction  between  mortal  and  venial  sins  became  of  great 
importance  in  the  administration  of  penance  and  remained  as  a  feature 
of  ecclesiastical  discipline  from  the  time  of  Tertullian.  The  origin  of 
the  distinction  was  still  earlier.  See  above,  an  extract  from  the  same 
work. 

We  ourselves  do  not  forget  the  distinction  between  sins, 
which  was  the  starting-point  of  our  discussion.  And  this,  too, 
for  John  has  sanctioned  it  [cf.  I  John  5  :  16],  because  there 
are  some  sins  of  daily  committal  to  which  we  are  all  liable; 
for  who  is  free  from  the  accident  of  being  angry  unjustly  and 
after  sunset;  or  even  of  using  bodily  violence;  or  easily 
speaking  evil;  or  rashly  swearing;  or  forfeiting  his  plighted 
word;  or  lying  from  bashfulness  or  necessity?  In  business,  in 
official  duties,  in  trade,  in  food,  in  sight,  in  hearing,  by  how 
great  temptations  are  we  assailed!  So  that  if  there  were  no 
pardon  for  such  simple  sins  as  these,  salvation  would  be  un- 
attainable by  any.  Of  these,  then,  there  will  be  pardon 
through  the  successful  Intercessor  with  the  Father,  Christ. 
But  there  are  other  sins  wholly  different  from  these,  graver 
and  more  destructive,  such  as  are  incapable  of  pardon — mur- 
der, idolatry,  fraud,  apostasy,  blasphemy,  and,  of  course, 
adultery  and  fornication  and  whatever  other  violation  of  the 
temple  of  God  there  may  be.  For  these  Christ  will  no  more 
be  the  successful  Intercessor;  these  will  not  at  all  be  com- 
mitted by  any  one  who  has  been  born  of  God,  for  he  will 
cease  to  be  the  son  of  God  if  he  commit  them. 


SCHOOL   OF  ALEXANDRIA  189 


§  43.  The  Catechetical  School  of  Alexandrl\:    Clement 

AND  Origen 

Three  types  of  theology  developed  in  the  ante-Nicene 
Church:  the  Asia  Minor  school,  best  represented  by  Irenaeus 
(^'-  §  33);  the  North  African,  represented  by  TertulHan  and 
Cyprian  (v.  §  39);  and  the  Alexandrian,  in  the  Catechetical 
School  of  which  Clement  and  Origen  were  the  most  distin- 
guished members.  In  the  Alexandrian  theology  the  tradition 
of  the  apologists  (v.  §  32)  that  Christianity  was  a  revealed 
philosophy  was  continued,  especially  by  Clement.  Origen, 
following  the  bent  of  his  genius,  developed  other  sides  of 
Christian  thought  as  well,  bringing  it  all  into  a  more  sys- 
tematic form  than  had  ever  before  been  attempted.  The 
Catechetical  School  of  Alexandria  was  the  most  celebrated  of 
all  the  educational  institutions  of  Christian  antiquity.  It 
aimed  to  give  a  general  secular  and  religious  training.  It 
appears  to  have  been  in  existence  well  before  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  having  been  founded,  it  is  thought,  by  Pan- 
taenus.  Clement  assisted  in  the  instruction  from  190,  and 
from  about  200  was  head  of  the  school  for  a  few  years.  In 
202  or  203  he  was  forced  by  persecution  under  Septimius 
Severus  to  flee  from  the  city.  He  died  before  215.  Of  his 
works,  the  most  important  is  his  three-part  treatise  composed 
of  his  Protrepticus,  an  apologetic  work  addressed  to  the  Greeks; 
his  Pcedegogus,  a  treatise  on  Christian  morality;  and  his 
Stromata,  or  miscellanies.  Origen  became  head  of  the  Cat- 
echetical School  in  203,  when  but  eighteen  years  old,  and 
remained  in  that  position  until  232,  when,  having  been  irreg- 
ularly ordained  priest  outside  his  own  diocese  and  being  sus- 
pected of  heresy,  he  was  deposed.  But  he  removed  to  Caesarea 
in  Palestine,  where  he  continued  his  work  with  the  greatest 
success  and  was  held  in  the  highest  honor  by  the  Church  in 
Palestine  and  parts  other  than  Egypt.  He  died  254  or  255  at 
Tyre,  having  previously  suffered  severely  in  the  Decian  perse- 


igo      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

cution.  His  works  are  of  the  highest  importance  in  various 
fields  of  theology.  De  Principiis  is  the  first  attempt  to  pre- 
sent in  connected  form  the  whole  range  of  Christian  theology. 
His  commentaries  cover  nearly  the  entire  Bible.  His  Contra 
Celsum  is  the  greatest  of  all  early  apologies.  The  Hexapla 
was  the  most  elaborate  piece  of  text-criticism  of  antiquity. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Eist.  Ec,  VI,  deals  at  length 
with  Origen;  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Panegyric  on  Origen,  in  ANF, 
VI. 

{a)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Stromata,  1,  5.    (MSG,  8  :  717.) 

Clement's  view  of  the  relation  of  Greek  philosophy  to  Christian 
revelation  is  almost  identical  with  that  of  the  apologists,  as  are  also 
many  of  his  fundamental  concepts. 

Before  the  advent  of  the  Lord  philosophy  was  necessary 
to  the  Greeks  for  righteousness.  And  now  it  becomes  useful 
to  piety,  being  a  kind  of  preparatory  training  to  those  who 
attain  to  faith  through  demonstration.  ''For  thy  foot,"  it  is 
said,  ''will  not  stumble"  if  thou  refer  what  is  good,  whether 
belonging  to  the  Greeks  or  to  us,  to  Providence.  For  God  is 
the  cause  of  all  good  things;  but  of  some  primarily,  as  of 
the  Old  and  the  New  Testament,  and  of  others  by  conse- 
quence, as  philosophy.  Perchance,  too,  philosophy  was  given 
to  the  Greeks  directly  till  the  Lord  should  call  the  Greeks 
also.  For  this  was  a  schoolmaster  to  bring  the  Hellenic  mind 
to  Christ,  as  was  the  law  to  bring  the  Hebrews.  Philosophy, 
therefore,  was  a  preparation,  paving  the  way  for  him  who  is 
perfected  in  Christ. 

"Now,"  says  Solomon,  "defend  wisdom,  and  it  will  exalt 
thee,  and  it  will  shield  thee  with  a  crown  of  pleasure. "  ^  For 
when  thou  hast  strengthened  wisdom  with  a  breastwork  by 
philosophy,  and  with  expenditure,  thou  wilt  preserve  her 
unassailable  by  sophists.  The  way  of  truth  is  therefore  one. 
But  into  it,  as  into  a  perennial  river,  streams  flow  from  every 
side. 

^  Proverbs  4  :  8,  9. 


SCHOOL  OF  ALEXANDRIA     ^  191 

(b)  Clement  of  Alexandria,   Stromata,   VII,    10.     (MSG, 

9  •  47-) 

See  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Vllth  Book  of  the  Stromateis,  ed.  by  Hort 
and  Mayor,  London,  1902.  In  making  faith  suffice  for  salvation, 
Clement  clearly  distinguishes  his  position  from  that  of  the  Gnostics, 
though  he  uses  the  term  "gnostic"  as  applicable  to  Christians.  See 
next  passage. 

Knowledge  [gnosis],  so  to  speak,  is  a  perfecting  of  man  as 
man,  which  is  brought  about  by  acquaintance  with  divine 
things;  in  character,  life,  and  word  harmonious  and  con- 
sistent with  itself  and  the  divine  Word.  For  by  it  faith  is 
made  perfect,  inasmuch  as  it  is  solely  by  it  that  the  man  of 
faith  becomes  perfect.  Faith  is  an  internal  good,  and  without 
searching  for  God  confesses  His  existence  and  glorifies  Him 
as  existent.  Hence  by  starting  with  this  faith,  and  being 
developed  by  it,  through  the  grace  of  God,  the  knowledge 
respecting  Him  is  to  be  acquired  as  far  as  possible.  .  .  . 

But  it  is  not  doubting,  in  reference  to  God,  but  beHeving, 
that  is  the  foundation  of  knowledge.  But  Christ  is  both  the 
foundation  and  the  superstructure,  by  whom  are  both  the 
beginning  and  the  end.  And  the  extreme  points,  the  begin- 
ning and  the  end,  I  mean  faith  and  love,  are  not  taught. 
But  knowledge,  which  is  conveyed  from  communication 
through  the  grace  of  God  as  a  deposit,  is  intrusted  to  those 
who  show  themselves  worthy  of  it;  and  from  it  the  worth 
of  love  beams  forth  from  light  to  light.  For  it  is  said,  ^'To 
him  that  hath  shall  be  given"  [cf.  Matt.  13  :  12] — to  faith, 
knowledge;  and  to  knowledge,  love;  and  to  love,  the  inher- 
itance. .  .  . 

Faith  then  is,  so  to  speak,  a  compendious  knowledge  of  the 
essentials;  but  knowledge  is  the  sure  and  firm  demonstration 
of  what  is  received  by  faith,  built  upon  faith  by  the  Lord's 
teaching,  conveying  us  on  to  unshaken  conviction  and  cer- 
tainty. And,  as  it  seems  to  me,  the  first  saving  change  is  that 
from  heathenism  to  faith,  as  I  said  before;  and  the  second, 
that  from  faith  to  knowledge.    And  this  latter  passing  on  to 


192     CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

love,  thereafter  gives  a  mutual  friendship  between  that  which 
knows  and  that  which  is  known.  And  perhaps  he  who  has 
already  arrived  at  this  stage  has  attained  equaHty  with  the 
angels.  At  any  rate,  after  he  has  reached  the  final  ascent  in 
the  flesh,  he  still  continues  to  advance,  as  is  fit,  and  presses 
on  through  the  holy  Hebdomad  into  the  Father's  house,  to 
that  which  is  indeed  the  Lord's  abode. 

(c)  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Stromata,  V,  ii.     (MSG,  9  : 
102,  106.) 
The  piety  of  the  Christian  Gnostic. 

The  sacrifice  acceptable  with  God  is  unchanging  alienation 
from  the  body  and  its  passions.  This  is  the  really  true  piety. 
And  is  not  philosophy,  therefore,  rightly  called  by  Socrates 
the  meditation  on  death?  For  he  who  neither  employs  his 
eyes  in  the  exercise  of  thought  nor  draws  from  his  other 
senses,  but  with  pure  mind  appHes  himself  to  objects,  prac- 
tises the  true  philosophy.  .  .  . 

It  is  not  without  reason,  therefore,  that  in  the  mysteries 
which  are  to  be  found  among  the  Greeks  lustrations  hold 
the  first  place;  as  also  the  laver  among  the  barbarians. 
After  these  are  the  minor  mysteries,  which  have  some  founda- 
tion for  instruction  and  preparation  for  what  is  to  follow. 
In  the  great  mysteries  concerning  the  universe  nothing 
remains  to  be  learned,  but  only  to  contemplate  and  compre- 
hend with  the  mind  nature  and  things.  We  shall  understand 
the  more  of  purification  by  confession,  and  of  contempla- 
tion by  analysis,  advancing  by  analysis  to  the  first  notion, 
beginning  with  the  properties  underlying  it;  abstracting  from 
the  body  its  physical  properties,  taking  away  the  dimension  of 
depth,  then  of  breadth,  and  then  of  length.  For  the  point 
which  remains  is  a  unit,  so  to  speak,  having  position;  from 
which,  if  we  abstract  position,  there  is  the  conception  of  unity. 

If,  then,  we  abstract  all  that  belongs  to  bodies  and  things 
called  incorporeal,  we  cast  ourselves  into  the  greatness  of 
Christ,  and  thence  advancing  into  immensity  by  holiness,  we 


SCHOOL  OF  ALEXANDRIA  193 

may  reach  somehow  to  the  conception  of  the  Almighty,  know- 
ing not  what  He  is,  but  knowing  what  He  is  not.  And  form 
and  motion,  or  standing,  or  a  throne  or  place,  or  right  hand  or 
left,  are  not  at  all  to  be  conceived  as  belonging  to  the  Father 
of  the  universe,  although  it  is  so  written.  For  what  each  of 
these  signifies  will  be  shown  in  the  proper  place.  The  First 
Cause  is  not  then  in  space,  but  above  time  and  space  and 
name  and  conception. 

{d)  Origen,  De  Principiis,  I,  2  :  2.    (MSG,  11  :  130.) 

Origen's  doctrine  of  the  "eternal  generation  of  the  Son"  was  of 
primary  importance  in  all  subsequent  discussions  on  the  Trinity. 

Let  no  one  imagine  that  we  mean  anything  unsubstantial 
when  we  call  Him  the  Wisdom  of  God;  or  suppose,  for  exam- 
ple, that  we  understand  Him  to  be,  not  a  Hving  being  en- 
dowed with  wisdom,  but  something  which  makes  men  wise, 
giving  itself  to,  and  implanting  itself  in,  the  minds  of  those 
who  are  made  capable  of  receiving  its  virtues  and  intelli- 
gence. If,  then,  it  is  once  rightly  understood  that  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  God  is  His  Wisdom  hypostatically  [substan- 
tialiter]  existing,  I  know  not  whether  our  mind  ought  to 
advance  beyond  this  or  entertain  any  suspicion  that  the 
hypostasis  or  substantia  contains  anything  of  a  bodily  nature, 
since  everything  corporeal  is  distinguished  either  by  form,  or 
color,  or  magnitude.  And  who  in  his  sound  senses  ever 
sought  for  form,  or  color,  or  size,  in  wisdom,  in  respect  of  its 
being  wisdom?  x\nd  who  that  is  capable  of  entertaining  rev- 
erential thoughts  or  feelings  regarding  God  can  suppose  or 
believe  that  God  the  Father  ever  existed,  even  for  a  moment  of 
time,  without  having  generated  this  Wisdom?  For  in  that 
case  he  must  say  either  that  God  was  unable  to  generate 
Wisdom  before  He  produced  her,  so  that  He  afterward 
called  into  being  that  which  formerly  did  not  exist,  or  that 
He  could,  but — what  is  impious  to  say  of  God — was  unwilHng 
to  generate;  both  of  which  suppositions,  it  is  patent  to  all, 
are  alike  absurd   and  impious :    for   they  amount  to   this, 


194      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

either  that  God  advanced  from  a  condition  of  inability  to  one 
of  ability,  or  that,  although  possessed  of  the  power,  He 
concealed  it,  and  delayed  the  generation  of  Wisdom.  There- 
fore we  have  always  held  that  God  is  the  Father  of  His  only 
begotten  Son,  who  was  born  indeed  of  Him,  and  derives  from 
Him,  what  He  is,  but  without  any  beginning,  not  only  such 
as  may  be  measured  by  any  divisions  of  time,  but  even  that 
which  the  mind  alone  contemplates  within  itself,  or  beholds, 
so  to  speak,  with  the  naked  soul  and  understanding.  And 
therefore  we  must  believe  that  Wisdom  was  generated  before 
any  beginning  that  can  be  either  comprehended  or  expressed. 

(e)  Origen,  De  Principiis,  I,  2  :  10.     (MSG,  11  :  138.) 

Origen's  doctrine  of  "eternal  creation"  was  based  upon  reasoning 
similar  to  that  employed  to  show  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son, 
but  it  was  rejected  by  the  Church,  and  figures  among  the  heresies 
known  as  Origenism.    See  below,  §§  87,  93. 

As  no  one  can  be  a  father  without  having  a  son,  nor  a 
master  without  possessing  a  servant,  so  even  God  cannot 
be  called  omnipotent^  unless  there  exists  those  over  whom 
He  may  exercise  His  power;  and  therefore,  that  God  may 
be  shown  to  be  almighty  it  is  necessary  that  all  things 
should  exist.  For  if  any  one  assumes  that  some  ages  or 
portions  of  time,  or  whatever  else  he  likes  to  call  them,  have 
passed  away,  while  those  things  which  have  been  made  did 
not  yet  exist,  he  would  undoubtedly  show  that  during  those 
ages  or  periods  God  was  not  omnipotent  but  became  omnip- 
otent afterward:  viz.,  from  the  time  that  He  began  to  have 
those  over  whom  He  exercised  power;  and  in  this  way  He 
will  appear  to  have  received  a  certain  increase,  and  to  have 
risen  from  a  lower  to  a  higher  condition;  since  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  it  is  better  for  Him  to  be  omnipotent  than  not 
to  be  so.  And,  now,  how  can  it  appear  otherwise  than  absurd, 
that  when  God  possessed  none  of  those  things  which  it  was 
befitting  for  Him  to  possess,  He  should  afterward,  by  a  kind 

1/.  e.,  having  rule  over  all,  not  merely  able  to  do  all,  and  so  throughout. 


/ 


SCHOOL  OF  ALEXANDRIA  195 

of  progress,  come  to  have  them?  But  if  there  never  was  a 
time  when  He  was  not  omnipotent/  of  necessity  those  things 
by  which  He  receives  that  title  must  also  exist;  and  He  must 
always  have  had  those  over  whom  He  exercised  power,  and 
which  were  governed  by  Him  either  as  king  or  prince,  of  which 
we  shall  speak  more  fully  when  we  come  to  discuss  the  sub- 
ject of  creatures. 

(/)  Origen,  De  Principiis,  H,  9  :  6.     (MSG,  11  :  230.) 

The  theory  of  pre-existence  and  the  pretemporal  fall  of  each  soul 
was  the  basis  of  Origan's  theodicy.  It  caused  great  offence  in  after 
years  when  theology  became  more  stereotyped,  and  it  has  retained  no 
place  in  the  Church's  thought,  for  the  idea  ran  too  clearly  counter  to 
the  biblical  account  of  the  Fall  of  Adam. 

We  have  frequently  shown  by  those  statements  which  we 
are  able  to  adduce  from  the  divine  Scriptures  that  God,  the 
Creator  of  all  things,  is  good,  and  just,  and  all-powerful. 
When  in  the  beginning  He  created  all  those  beings  whom  He 
desired  to  create,  i.  e.,  rational  natures.  He  had  no  other 
reason  for  creating  them  than  on  account  of  Himself,  i.  e., 
His  goodness.  As  He  himself,  then,  was  the  cause  of  the 
existence  of  those  things  which  were  to  be  created,  in  whom 
there  was  neither  any  variation  nor  change  nor  want  of  power, 
He  created  all  whom  He  made  equal  and  alike,  because  there 
was  no  reason  for  Him  to  produce  variety  and  diversity. 
But  3ince  those  rational  creatures  themselves,  as  we  have 
frequently  shown  and  will  yet  show  in  the  proper  place,  were 
endowed  with  the  power  of  free  choice,  this  freedom  of  his 
will  incited  each  one  either  to  progress  by  imitation  of  God  or 
induced  him  to  failure  through  negHgence.  And  this,  as  we 
have  already  stated,  is  the  cause  of  the  diversity  among 
rational  creatures,  deriving  its  origin  not  from  the  will  or 
judgment  of  the  Creator,  but  from  the  freedom  of  the  indi- 
vidual will.  God,  however,  who  deemed  it  just  to  arrange 
His  creatures  according  to  merit,  brought  down  these  differ- 

^The  Greek  is  preserved  here  and  throws  light  on  the  reasoning.  The 
Latin  omnipotens  stands  for  xavxoxpdxwp. 


196      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

ences  of  understanding  into  the  harmony  of  one  world,  that 
He  might  adorn,  as  it  were,  one  dwelling,  in  which  there 
ought  to  be  not  only  vessels  of  gold  and  silver,  but  also  of 
wood  and  clay  and  some,  indeed,  to  honor  and  others  to  dis- 
honor, with  those  different  vessels,  or  souls,  or  understand- 
ings. And  these  are  the  causes,  in  my  opinion,  why  that 
world  presents  the  aspect  of  diversity,  while  Divine  Providence 
continues  to  regulate  each  individual  according  to  the  variety 
of  his  movements  or  of  his  feelings  and  purpose.  On  which 
account  the  Creator  will  neither  appear  to  be  unjust  in  dis- 
tributing (for  the  causes  already  mentioned)  to  every  one 
according  to  his  merits;  nor  will  the  happiness  or  unhappi- 
ness  of  each  one's  birth,  or  whatever  be  the  condition  that 
falls  to  his  lot,  be  deemed  accidental;  nor  will  different  cre- 
ators, or  souls  of  different  natures,  be  believed  to  exist. 

(g)  Origen,  Homil.  in  Exod.,  VI,  9.    (MSG,  12  :  338.) 

In  the  following  passage  from  Origen's  Commentary  on  Exodus 
and  the  four  following  passages  are  stated  the  essential  points  of 
Origen's  theory  of  redemption.  In  this  theory  there  are  two  elements 
which  have  been  famous  in  the  history  of  Christian  thought :  the  rela- 
tion of  the  death  of  Christ  to  the  devil,  and  the  ultimate  salvation  of 
every  soul.  The  theory  that  Christ's  death  was  a  ransom  paid  to  the 
devil  was  developed  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  Gregory  the  Great, 
and  reappeared  constantly  in  theology  down  to  the  scholastic  period, 
when  it  was  overthrown  by  Anselm  and  the  greater  scholastics. 
Universal  redemption  or  salvation,  especially  when  it  included  Satan 
himself,  was  never  taken  up  by  Church  theologians  to  any  extent, 
and  was  one  of  the  positions  condemned  as  Origenism.    See  §  93. 

It  is  certain,  they  say,  that  one  does  not  buy  that  which 
is  his  own.  But  the  Apostle  says:  "Ye  are  bought  with  a 
price."  But  hear  what  the  prophet  says:  '^You  have  been 
sold  as  slaves  to  your  sins,  and  for  your  iniquities  I  have 
put  away  your  mother."  Thou  seest,  therefore,  that  we  are 
the  creatures  of  God,  but  each  one  has  been  sold  to  his  sins, 
and  has  fallen  from  his  Creator.  Therefore  we  belong  to  God, 
inasmuch  as  we  have  been  created  by  Him,  but  we  have 
become  the  servants  of  the  devil,  inasmuch  as  we  have  been 


SCHOOL  OF  ALEXANDRIA  197 

sold  to  our  sins.  But  Christ  came  to  redeem  us  when  we  were 
servants  to  that  master  to  whom  we  had  sold  ourselves  by 
sinning. 

Qi)  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  VII,  17.     (MSG,  11  :  1445.) 

If  we  consider  Jesus  in  relation  to  the  divinity  that  was  in 
Him,  the  things  which  He  did  in  this  capacity  are  holy  and  do 
not  offend  our  idea  of  God;  and  if  we  consider  Him  as  a  man, 
distinguished  beyond  all  others  by  an  intimate  communion 
with  the  very  Word,  with  Absolute  Wisdom,  He  suffered  as 
one  who  was  wise  and  perfect  whatever  it  behooved  Him  to 
suffer,  who  did  all  for  the  good  of  the  human  race,  yea,  even 
for  the  good  of  all  intelligent  beings.  And  there  is  nothing 
absurd  in  the  fact  that  a  man  died,  and  that  his  death  was  not 
only  an  example  of  death  endured  for  the  sake  of  piety,  but 
also  the  first  blow  in  the  conflict  which  is  to  overthrow  the 
power  of  the  evil  spirit  of  the  devil,  who  had  obtained  domin- 
ion over  the  whole  world.  For  there  are  signs  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  empire ;  namely,  those  who  through  the  coming  of 
Christ  are  everywhere  escaping  from  the  power  of  demons, 
and  who  after  their  deliverance  from  this  bondage  in  which 
they  were  held  consecrate  themselves  to  God,  and  according 
to  their  abiHty  devote  themselves  day  by  day  to  advance- 
ment in  a  life  of  piety. 

(i)  Origen,  Homil.  in  Matt.,  XVI,  8.    (MSG,  13  :  1398.) 

He  did  this  in  service  of  our  salvation  so  far  that  He  gave 
His  soul  a  ransom  for  many  who  believed  on  Him.  If  all 
had  beHeved  on  Him,  He  would  have  given  His  soul  as  a 
ransom  for  all.  To  whom  did  He  give  His  soul  as  a  ransom 
for  many?  Certainly  not  to  God.  Then  was  it  not  to  the 
Evil  One?  For  that  one  reigned  over  us  until  the  soul  of 
Jesus  was  given  as  a  ransom  for  us.  This  he  had  especially 
demanded,  deceived  by  the  imagination  that  he  could  rule 
over  it,  and  he  was  not  mindful  of  the  fact  that  he  could  not 
endure  the  torment  connected  with  holding  it  fast.     There- 


198      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

fore  death,  which  appeared  to  reign  over  Him,  did  not  reign 
over  Him,  since  He  was  '^free  among  the  dead"  and  stronger 
than  the  power  of  death.  He  is,  indeed,  so  far  superior  to  it 
that  all  who  from  among  those  overcome  by  death  will 
follow  Him  can  follow  Him,  as  death  is  unable  to  do  anything 
against  them.  .  .  .  We  are  therefore  redeemed  with  the 
precious  blood  of  Jesus.  As  a  ransom  for  us  the  soul  of  the 
Son  of  God  has  been  given  (not  His  spirit,  for  this,  according 
to  Luke  [cf.  Luke  23  :  46]  He  had  previously  given  to  His 
Father,  saying:  ^^Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commit  my  spirit") ; 
also,  not  His  body,  for  concerning  this  we  find  nothing  men- 
tioned. And  when  He  had  given  His  soul  as  a  ransom  for 
many,  He  did  not  remain  in  the  power  of  him  to  whom  the  ran- 
som was  given  for  many,  because  it  says  in  the  sixteenth 
psalm  [Psalm  16  :  10]:  ''Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell." 

(/)  Origen,  De  Principiis,  I,  6  :  3.    (MSG,  11  :  168.) 
The  following  states  in  brief  the  theory  of  universal  salvation. 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  certain  beings 
who  fell  away  from  that  one  beginning  of  which  we  have 
spoken,  have  given  themselves  to  such  wickedness  and  malice 
as  to  be  deemed  altogether  undeserving  of  that  training  and 
instruction  by  which  the  human  race  while  in  the  flesh  are 
trained  and  instructed  with  the  assistance  of  the  heavenly 
powers:  they  continue,  on  the  contrary,  in  a  state  of  enmity 
and  opposition  to  those  who  are  receiving  this  instruction 
and  teaching.  And  hence  it  is  that  the  whole  Hfe  of  mortals 
is  full  of  certain  struggles  and  trials,  caused  by  the  opposition 
and  enmity  against  us  of  those  who  fell  from  a  better  con- 
dition without  at  all  looking  back,  and  who  are  called  the 
devil  and  his  angels,  and  other  orders  of  evil,  which  the  Apostle 
classed  among  the  opposing  powers.  But  whether  any  of 
these  orders,  who  act  under  the  government  of  the  devil 
and  obey  his  wicked  commands,  will  be  able  in  a  future  world 
to  be  converted  to  righteousness  because  of  their  possessing 
the  faculty  of  freedom  of  will,  or  whether  persistent  and 


SCHOOL  OF  ALEXANDRIA  199 

inveterate  wickedness  may  be  changed  by  habit  into  a  kind 
of  nature,  you,  reader,  may  decide;  yet  so  that  neither  in 
those  things  which  are  seen  and  temporal  nor  in  those  which 
are  unseen  and  eternal  one  portion  is  to  differ  wholly  from 
the  final  unity  and  fitness  of  things.  But  in  the  meantime, 
both  in  those  temporal  worlds  which  are  seen,  and  in  those 
eternal  worlds  which  are  invisible,  all  those  beings  are 
arranged  according  to  a  regular  plan,  in  the  order  and  degree 
of  merit;  so  that  some  of  them  in  the  first,  others  in  the 
second,  some  even  in  the  last  times,  after  having  undergone 
heavier  and  severer  punishments,  endured  for  a  lengthened 
period  and  for  many  ages,  so  to  speak,  improved  by  this  stern 
method  of  training,  and  restored  at  first  by  the  instruction 
of  angels  and  subsequently  advanced  by  powers  of  a  higher 
grade,  and  thus  advancing  through  each  stage  to  a  better 
condition,  reach  even  to  that  which  is  invisible  and  eternal, 
having  travelled  by  a  kind  of  training  through  every  single 
office  of  the  heavenly  powers.  From  which,  I  think,  this  will 
follow  as  an  inference — that  every  rational  nature  can,  in 
passing  from  one  order  to  another,  go  through  each  to  all, 
and  advance  from  all  to  each,  while  made  the  subject  of  various 
degrees  of  proficiency  and  failure,  according  to  its  own  actions 
and  endeavors,  put  forth  in  the  enjoyment  of  its  power  of 
freedom  of  will. 

(k)  Origen,  De  Principiis,  IV,  9-15.  (MSG,  11  :  360,  363, 
373-) 

Allegorism. 

The  method  of  exegesis  known  as  allegorism,  whereby  the  specula- 
tions of  the  Christian  theologians  were  provided  with  an  apparently 
scriptural  basis,  was  taken  over  from  the  Jewish  and  Greek  philos- 
ophers and  theologians  who  employed  it  in  the  study  of  their  sacred 
books.  Origen,  it  should  be  added,  contributed  not  a  little  to  a  sound 
grammatical  interpretation  as  well.  For  Porphyry's  criticism  of 
Origen's  methods  of  exegesis  see  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  19. 

Ch.  9.  Now  the  cause,  in  all  the  points  previously  enu- 
merated, of  the  false  opinions  and  of  the  impious  statements 


200      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

or  ignorant  assertions  about  God  appears  to  be  nothing  else 
than  that  the  Scriptures  are  not  understood  according  to 
their  spiritual  meaning,  but  are  interpreted  according  to  the 
mere  letter.  And  therefore  to  those  who  believe  that  the 
sacred  books  are  not  the  compositions  of  men,  but  were  com- 
posed by  the  inspirations  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  according  to 
the  will  of  the  Father  of  all  things  through  Jesus  Christ,  and 
that  they  have  come  down  to  us,  we  must  point  out  the  modes 
of  interpretation  which  appear  correct  to  us,  who  cling  to 
the  standard  of  the  heavenly  Church  according  to  the  suc- 
cession of  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ.  Now  that  there  are 
certain  mystical  economies  made  known  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, all,  even  the  most  simple  of  those  who  adhere  to  the 
word,  have  believed;  but  what  these  are,  the  candid  and 
modest  confess  they  know  not.  If,  then,  one  were  to  be  per- 
plexed about  the  incest  of  Lot  with  his  daughters,  and  about 
the  two  wives  of  Abraham,  and  the  two  sisters  married  to 
Jacob,  and  the  two  handmaids  who  bore  him  children,  they 
can  return  no  other  answer  than  this — that  these  are  mysteries 
not  understood  by  us.  .  .  . 

Ch.  II.  The  way,  then,  as  it  seems  to  me,  in  which  we  ought 
to  deal  with  the  Scriptures  and  extract  from  them  their 
meaning  is  the  following,  which  has  been  ascertained  from 
the  sa3dngs  [of  the  Scriptures]  themselves.  By  Solomon  in 
the  Proverbs  we  find  some  rule  as  this  enjoined  respecting 
the  teaching  of  the  divine  writings,  "And  do  thou  portray 
them  in  a  threefold  manner,  in  counsel  and  knowledge,  to 
answer  words  of  truth  to  them  who  propose  them  to  thee" 
[cf.  Prov.  22  :  20  /.,  LXX].  One  ought,  then,  to  portray 
the  ideas  of  Holy  Scripture  in  a  threefold  manner  upon  his 
soul,  in  order  that  the  simple  man  may  be  edified  by  the 
"flesh,"  as  it  were,  of  Scripture,  for  so  we  name  the  obvious 
sense;  while  he  who  has  ascended  a  certain  way  may  be  edified 
by  the  "soul,"  as  it  were.  The  perfect  man,  and  he  who 
resembles  those  spoken  of  by  the  Apostle,  when  he  says, 
"We  speak  wisdom  among  them  that  are  perfect,  but  not 


SCHOOL   OF   ALEXANDRIA  201 

the  wisdom  of  the  world,  nor  of  the  rulers  of  this  world,  who 
come  to  nought;  but  we  speak  the  wisdom  of  God  in  a  mys- 
tery, the  hidden  wisdom,  which  God  hath  ordained  before 
the  ages  unto  our  glory"  [I  Cor.  2  :  6,  7],  may  receive  edifi- 
cation from  the  spiritual  law,  which  was  a  shadow  of  things 
to  come.  For  as  man  consists  of  body  and  soul  and  spirit, 
so  in  the  same  way  does  the  Scripture  consist,  which  has 
been  arranged  by  God  for  the  salvation  of  men. 

Ch.  12.  But  as  there  are  certain  passages  which  do  not 
contain  at  all  the  '^ corporeal"  sense,  as  we  shall  show  in  the 
following,  there  are  also  places  where  we  must  seek  only  for 
the  "soul,"  as  it  were,  and  '^ spirit"  of  Scripture. 

Ch.  15.  But  since,  if  the  usefulness  of  the  legislation  and 
the  sequence  and  beauty  of  the  history  were  universally 
evident,  we  should  not  beheve  that  any  other  thing  could 
be  understood  in  the  Scriptures  save  what  was  obvious,  the 
Word  of  God  has  arranged  that  certain  stumbling-blocks, 
and  offences,  and  impossibilities,  should  be  introduced  into 
the  midst  of  the  law  and  the  history,  in  order  that  we  may  not, 
through  being  drawn  away  in  all  directions  by  the  merely 
attractive  nature  of  the  language,  either  altogether  fall  away 
from  the  true  doctrines,  as  learning  nothing  worthy  of  God, 
or,  by  not  departing  from  the  letter,  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  nothing  more  divine.  And  this,  also,  we  must  know :  that, 
since  the  principal  aim  is  to  announce  the  "spiritual"  connec- 
tion in  those  things  that  are  done  and  that  ought  to  be  done 
where  the  Word  found  that  things  done  according  to  the 
history  could  be  adapted  to  these  mystic  senses.  He  made  use 
of  them,  conceaHng  from  the  multitude  the  deeper  meaning; 
but  where  in  the  narrative  of  the  development  of  super- 
sensual  things  there  did  not  follow  the  performance  of  those 
certain  events  which  was  already  indicated  by  the  mystical 
meaning  the  Scripture  interwove  in  the  history  the  account 
of  some  event  that  did  not  take  place,  sometimes  what 
could  not  have  happened;  sometimes  what  could,  but  did 
not   happen.  .  .  .  And    at    other    times   impossibilities    are 


202      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

recorded  for  the  sake  of  the  more  skilful  and  inquisitive, 
in  order  that  they  may  give  themselves  to  the  toil  of  investi- 
gation of  what  is  written,  and  thus  attain  to  a  becoming 
conviction  of  the  manner  in  which  a  meaning  worthy  of  God 
must  be  sought  out  in  such  subjects. 

§  44.    Neo-Platonism 

The  last  phase  of  Hellenic  philosophy  was  religious.  It 
aimed  to  combine  the  principles  of  many  schools  of  the  earlier 
period  and  to  present  a  metaphysical  system  that  would  at 
once  give  a  theory  of  being  and  also  furnish  a  philosophical 
basis  for  the  new  religious  life.  This  final  philosophy  of  the 
antique  world  was  Neo-Platonism.  It  was  thoroughly  ec- 
lectic in  its  treatment  of  earHer  systems,  but  under  Plotinus 
attained  no  small  degree  of  consistency.  The  emphasis  was 
laid  especially  upon  the  reHgious  problems,  and  in  the  system 
it  may  be  fairly  said  that  the  religious  aspirations  of  heathen- 
ism found  their  highest  and  purest  expression.  Because  it 
was  in  close  touch  with  current  culture  and  in  its  metaphysi- 
cal principles  was  closely  akin  to  the  philosophy  of  the  Church 
teachers,  we  find  Neo-Platonism  sometimes  a  bitter  rival  of 
Christianity,  at  other  times  a  preparation  for  the  Christian 
faith,  as  in  the  case  of  Augustine  and  Victorinus. 

Additional  source  material:  Select  Works  of  Plotinus,  translated  by 
Thomas  Taylor,  ed.  G.  R.  S.  Mead,  London,  1909  (contains  bibliog- 
raphy of  other  translations  of  Plotinus,  including  those  in  French  and 
German  together  with  a  select  list  of  works  bearing  on  Neo-Platonism) ; 
Select  Works  of  Porphyry,  trans,  by  Thomas  Taylor,  London,  1823; 
Taylor  translated  much  from  all  the  Neo-Platonists,  but  his  other 
books  are  very  scarce.  Porphyry's  Epistula  ad  Marcellam,  trans,  by 
Alice  Zimmern,  London,  1896. 

Porphyry,  Ep.  ad  Marcellam,  16-19.  Porphyrii  philosophi 
Platonici  opuscula  tria,  rec.  A.  Nauck,  Leipsic,  i860. 

The  letter  is  addressed  to  Marcella  by  her  husband,  the  philosopher 
Porphyry.  It  gives  a  good  idea  of  the  religious  and  ethical  character 
of  Neo-Platonism.  For  the  metaphysical  aspects  see  Plotinus,  trans- 
lated by  T.  Taylor.     Porphyry  was,  after  Plotinus,  the  greatest  of 


NEO-PLATONISM  203 

the  Neo-Platonists,  and  brought  out  most  clearly  those  religious 
elements  which  were  rivals  to  Christianity.  His  attack  upon  Chris- 
tianity was  keen  and  bitter,  and  he  was  consequently  especially  hated 
by  the  Christians.    He  died  at  Rome  304. 

Ch.  16.  You  will  honor  God  best  when  you  form  your 
soul  to  resemble  him.  This  likeness  is  only  by  virtue;  for 
only  virtue  draws  the  soul  upward  toward  its  own  kind. 
There  is  nothing  greater  with  God  than  virtue;  but  God  is 
greater  than  virtue.  But  God  strengthens  him  who  does  what 
is  good;  but  of  evil  deeds  a  wicked  demon  is  the  instigator. 
Therefore  the  wicked  soul  flees  from  God  and  wishes  that  the 
foreknowledge  of  God  did  not  exist;  and  from  the  divine  law 
which  punishes  all  wickedness  it  shrinks  away  completely. 
But  a  wise  man's  soul  is  in  harmony  with  God,  ever  sees  Him, 
ever  is  with  Him.  But  if  that  which  rules  takes  pleasure  in 
that  which  is  ruled,  then  God  cares  for  the  wise  and  provides 
for  him;  and  therefore  is  the  wise  man  blessed,  because  he  is 
under  the  protection  of  God.  It  is  not  the  discourses  of  the 
wise  man  which  are  honorable  before  God,  but  his  works;  for 
the  wise  man,  even  when  he  keeps  silence,  honors  God,  but 
the  ignorant  man,  even  in  praying  and  sacrificing,  dishonors 
the  Divinity.  So  the  wise  man  alone  is  a  priest,  alone  is 
dear  to  God,  alone  knows  how  to  pray. 

Ch.  17.  He  who  practises  wisdom  practises  the  knowledge 
of  God;  though  not  always  in  prayer  and  sacrifice,  prac- 
tising piety  toward  God  by  his  works.  For  a  man  is  not 
rendered  agreeable  to  God  by  ruling  himself  according  to  the 
prejudices  of  men  and  the  vain  declamations  of  the  sophists. 
It  is  the  man  himself  who,  by  his  own  works,  renders  himself 
agreeable  to  God,  and  is  deified  by  the  conforming  of  his  own 
soul  to  the  incorruptible  blessed  One.  And  it  is  he  himself 
who  makes  himself  impious  and  displeasing  to  God,  not 
suffering  evil  from  God,  for  the  Divinity  does  only  what  is 
good.  It  is  the  man  himself  who  causes  his  evils  by  his  false 
beliefs  in  regard  to  God.  The  impious  is  not  so  much  he 
who  does  not  honor  the  statues  of  the  gods  as  he  who  mixes 


204^    CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

up  with  the  idea  of  God  the  superstitions  of  the  vulgar.  As 
for  thyself,  do  not  hold  any  unworthy  idea  of  God,  of  his 
blessedness  or  of  his  incorruptibility. 

Ch.  i8.  The  greatest  fruit  of  piety  is  this — to  honor  the 
Deity  according  to  our  fatherland;  not  that  He  has  need  of 
anything,  but  His  holy  and  happy  Majesty  invites  us  to 
offer  Him  our  homage.  Altars  consecrated  to  God  do  no  harm, 
and  when  neglected  they  render  no  help.  But  he  who  honors 
God  as  needing  anything  declares,  without  knowing  it,  that 
he  is  superior  to  God.  Therefore  it  is  not  angering  God 
that  harms  us,  but  not  knowing  God,  for  wrath  is  aHen  to 
God,  because  it  is  the  product  of  the  involuntary,  and  there 
is  nothing  involuntary  in  God.  Do  not  then  dishonor  the 
Divinity  by  human  false  opinions,  for  thou  wilt  not  thereby 
injure  the  Being  enjoying  eternal  blessedness,  from  whose 
incorruptible  nature  every  injury  is  repelled. 

Ch.  19.  But  thou  shouldest  not  think  that  I  say  these 
things  when  I  exhort  to  the  worship  of  God;  for  he  who 
exhorts  to  this  would  be  ridiculous;  as  if  it  were  possible  to 
doubt  concerning  this;  and  we  do  not  worship  Him  aright 
doing  this  thing  or  thinking  that  about  God.^  Neither 
tears  nor  supplications  turn  God  from  His  purpose;  nor  do 
sacrifices  honor  God,  nor  the  multitude  of  offerings  glorify 
God,  but  the  godlike  mind  well  governed  enters  into  union 
with  God.  For  like  is  of  necessity  joined  to  like.  But  the 
victims  of  the  senseless  crowd  are  food  for  the  flames,  and 
their  offerings  are  the  suppHes  for  a  licentious  life  to  the 
plunderers  of  temples.  But,  as  I  have  said  to  thee,  let  the 
mind  within  thee  be  the  temple  of  God.  This  must  be 
tended  and  adorned  to  become  a  fit  dwelling  for  God. 

^I.  e.,  it  is  not  certain  rites  nor  certain  beliefs  that  give  merit  to  our 
worship. 


THE  DECIAN-VALERIAN  PERSECUTION      205' 


CHAPTER  III.     THE  FIRST  GENERAL  PERSECUTION  AND 
ITS    CONSEQUENCES 

On  account  of  various  principles  of  the  Roman  law,  Chris- 
tians were  always  liable  to  severe  penalties,  and  parts  of  the 
Church  occasionally  suffered  fearfully.  But  it  was  only  in 
exceptional  cases  and  sporadically  that  the  laws  were  en- 
forced. There  was,  accordingly,  no  prolonged  and  systematic 
effort  made  to  put  down  Christianity  everywhere  until  the 
reign  of  Decius  (249-251).  The  renewed  interest  in  heathen 
religions  and  the  revived  patriotism  in  some  circles  occasioned 
in  248  by  the  celebration  of  the  thousandth  anniversary  of 
the  founding  of  Rome  may  have  contributed  to  a  renewal  of 
hostihties  against  the  Church.  Decius  undertook  the  mil- 
itary defence  of  the  frontier.  His  colleague,  Valerian,  had 
charge  of  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Empire  and  was  the 
author  of  the  measures  against  the  Christians.  Because  the 
Church  included  many  who  had  embraced  the  faith  in  the 
long  period  when  the  Church  rarely  felt  the  severity  of  the 
laws,  many  were  unable  to  endure  the  persecution,  and  so 
apostatized  or  ''fell."  The  persecution  continued  only  for  a 
short  time  in  full  intensity,  but  it  was  not  abandoned  for  a 
number  of  years.  It  became  violent  once  more  when  Valerian 
became  Emperor  (253-260).  One  result  of  the  persecutions 
was  the  rise  of  serious  disputes,  and  even  schisms,  from  differ- 
ences regarding  the  administration  of  discipline  by  the  bishops. 
In  the  case  of  the  Novatians  at  Rome,  a  dissenting  Church 
which  spread  rapidly  over  the  Empire  came  into  existence 
and  lasted  for  more  than  two  centuries. 

For  the  Hterature  see  the  following  articles: 

§  45.   The  Decian- Valerian  Persecution. 
§  46.   The  Effects  of  the  Persecution  upon  the  Inner  Life 
of  the  Church. 


2o6      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 


§  45.  The  Decian- Valerian  Persecution 

The  first  persecution  which  may  fairly  be  said  to  have  been 
general  in  purpose  and  effect  was  that  falling  in  the  reigns 
of  Decius  (249-251)  and  Valerian  (253-260).  Of  the  course 
of  the  persecution  we  have  information  bearing  directly  upon 
Carthage,  Alexandria,  and  Asia  Minor.  But  it  probably  was 
felt  very  generally  throughout  the  Church. 

Additional  source  material:  Cyprian,  De  Lapsis,  Epp.  14,  22,  43; 
Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  39-45,  VII,  11,  15,  30:  for  original  texts  see 
Preuschen,  Analecta,  I,  §§  16,  17;  also  R.  Knopf,  Ausgewdhlte  Mdriyrer- 
acten  (of  these  the  most  reliable  are  the  martyrdom  of  Pionius  and  of 
Cyprian). 

{a)  Origen,  Contra  Celsum,  III,  15.     (MSG,  11  :  937.) 

Origen,  writing  about  248,  observes  the  probable  approach  of  a  period 
of  persecution  for  the  Church. 

That  it  is  not  the  fear  of  external  enemies  which  strengthens 
our  union  is  plain  from  the  fact  that  this  cause,  by  God's 
will,  has  already  ceased  for  a  considerable  time.  And  it  is 
probable  that  the  secure  existence,  so  far  as  this  life  is  con- 
cerned, which  is  enjoyed  by  believers  at  present  will  come 
to  an  end,  since  those  who  in  every  way  calumniate  the 
Word  [i.  e.y  Christianity]  are  again  attributing  the  frequency 
of  rebellion  to  the  multitude  of  believers  and  to  their  not 
being  persecuted  by  the  authorities,  as  in  former  times. 

{h)  Lac  tan  tins,  De  Mortihus  Persecutorum,  3,  4.  (MSL,  7  : 
200.) 

Lucius  Caelius  Firminianus  Lactantius  was  of  African  birth.  Having 
obtained  some  local  fame  as  a  teacher  of  rhetoric,  he  was  appointed 
by  Diocletian  professor  of  that  subject  in  his  new  capital  of  Nicomedia. 
This  position  Lactantius  lost  during  the  Diocletian  persecution. 
He  was  afterward  tutor  of  Crispus,  the  son  of  Constantine.  His 
work  On  the  Death  of  the  Persecutors  is  written  in  a  bitter  spirit,  but 
excellent  style.  Although  in  some  circles  it  has  been  customary  to 
impeach  the  veracity  of  Lactantius,  no  intentional  departure  from 
historical   truthfulness,    apart   from   rhetorical   coloring,    which   was 


THE  DECIAN-VALERIAN  PERSECUTION     207 

inevitable,  has  been  proved  against  him.    Of  late  there  has  been  some 
doubt  as  to  the  authorship  of  De  Mortibus  Persecutorum. 

Ch.  3.  ...  This  long  peace,  however,  was  afterward 
interrupted. 

Ch.  4.  For  after  many  years  there  appeared  in  the  world 
an  accursed  wild  beast,  Decius  by  name,  who  should  afHict 
the  Church.  And  who  but  a  bad  man  would  persecute 
righteousness?  As  if  for  this  end  he  had  been  raised  up  to 
sovereign  eminence,  he  began  at  once  to  rage  against  God, 
and  at  once  to  fall.  For  having  undertaken  an  expedition 
against  the  Carpi,  who  had  then  occupied  Dacia  and  Moesia, 
he  was  suddenly  surrounded  by  the  barbarians,  and  slain,  to- 
gether with  a  great  part  of  his  army;  nor  could  he  be  honored 
with  the  rights  of  sepulture,  but,  stripped  and  naked,  he  lay  as 
food  for  wild  beasts  and  birds,  as  became  the  enemy  of  God. 

(c)  Eusebius,  HisL  Ec,  VI,  39.    (MSG,  20  :  660.) 
The  Decian  persecution  and  the  sufferings  of  Origen. 

Decius  succeeded  Philip,  who  had  reigned  seven  years. 
On  account  of  his  hatred  of  Philip,  Decius  commenced  a  per- 
secution of  the  churches,  in  which  Fabianus  suffered  martyr- 
dom at  Rome,  and  Cornelius  succeeded  him  in  the  episcopate. 
In  Palestine,  Alexander,  bishop  of  the  church  of  Jerusalem, 
was  brought  again  on  Christ's  account  before  the  governor's 
judgment  seat  in  Caesarea,  and  having  acquitted  himself  nobly 
in  a  second  confession,  was  cast  into  prison,  crowned  with  the 
hoary  locks  of  venerable  age.  And  after  his  honorable  and 
illustrious  confession  at  the  tribunal  of  the  governor,  he  fell 
asleep  in  prison,  and  Mazabanes  became  his  successor  in  the 
bishopric  of  Jerusalem.  Babylas  in  Antioch  having,  like 
Alexander,  passed  away  in  prison  after  his  confession,  Fabius 
presided  over  that  church. 

But  how  many  and  how  great  things  came  upon  Origen 
in  the  persecution,  and  what  was  their  final  result — as  the 
evil  demon  marshalled  all  his  forces  and  fought  against  the 
man  with  his  utmost  craft  and  power,  assaulting  him  beyond 


2o8      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

all  others  against  whom  he  contended  at  that  time;  and 
what  and  how  many  things  the  man  endured  for  the  word 
of  Christ — bonds  and  bodily  tortures  and  torments  under  the 
iron  collar  and  in  the  dungeon;  and  how  for  many  days  with 
his  feet  stretched  four  spaces  of  the  stocks  he  bore  patiently 
the  threats  of  fire  and  whatever  other  things  were  inflicted 
by  his  enemies;  and  how  his  sufferings  terminated,  as  his 
judge  strove  eagerly  with  all  his  might  not  to  end  his  life; 
and  what  words  he  left  after  these  things  full  of  comfort  to 
those  needing  aid,  a  great  many  of  his  epistles  show  with 
truth  and  accuracy. 

(d)  Cyprian,  De  Lapsis,  8-10.     (MSL,  4  :  486.) 

The  many  cases  of  apostasy  in  the  Decian  persecution  shocked 
the  Church  inexpressibly.  In  peace  discipline  had  been  relaxed  and 
Christian  zeal  had  grown  weak.  The  same  phenomena  appeared  in 
the  next  great  persecution,  under  Diocletian,  after  a  long  period  of 
peace.  De  Lapsis  was  written  in  the  spring  of  251,  just  after  the  end 
of  the  severity  of  the  Decian  persecution  and  Cyprian's  return  to 
Carthage.    Text  in  part  in  Kirch,  nn.  227  ^. 

Ch.  8.  From  some,  alas,  all  these  things  have  fallen  away, 
and  have  passed  from  memory.  They  indeed  did  not  even 
wait,  that,  having  been  apprehended,  they  should  go  up,  or, 
having  been  interrogated,  they  might  deny.  Many  were 
conquered  before  the  battle,  prostrated  without  an  attack. 
Nor  did  they  even  leave  it  to  be  said  for  them  that  they  seemed, 
to  sacrifice  to  idols  unwillingly.  They  ran  to  the  forum  of 
their  own  accord;  freely  they  hastened  to  death,  as  if  they 
had  formerly  wished  it,  as  if  they  would  embrace  an  oppor- 
tunity now  given  which  they  had  always  desired.  How 
many  were  put  off  by  the  magistrates  at  that  time,  when 
evening  was  coming  on!  How  many  even  asked  that  their 
destruction  might  not  be  delayed!  What  violence  can  such 
a  one  plead,  how  can  he  purge  his  crime,  when  it  was  he  him- 
self who  rather  used  force  that  he  might  perish?  When  they 
came  voluntarily  to  the  capitol— when  they  freely  approached 
to  the  obedience  of  the  terrible  wickedness — did  not  their 


THE  DECIAN-VALERIAN  PERSECUTION     209 

tread  falter,  did  not  their  sight  darken,  their  hearts  tremble, 
their  arms  fall  helplessly  down,  their  senses  become  dull, 
their  tongues  cleave  to  their  mouths,  their  speech  fail?  Could 
the  servant  of  God  stand  there,  he  who  had  already  renounced 
the  devil  and  the  world,  and  speak  and  renounce  Christ? 
Was  not  that  altar,  whither  he  drew  near  to  die,  to  him  a 
funeral  pile?  Ought  he  not  to  shudder  at,  and  flee  from, 
the  altar  of  the  devil,  which  he  had  seen  to  smoke  and  to  be 
redolent  of  a  foul  stench,  as  it  were,  a  funeral  and  sepulchre 
of  his  Kfe?  Why  bring  with  you,  0  wretched  man,  a  sacrifice? 
Why  immolate  a  victim?  You  yourself  have  come  to  the 
altar  an  offering,  yourself  a  victim ;  there  you  have  immolated 
your  salvation,  your  hope;  there  you  have  burned  up  your 
faith  in  those  deadly  fires. 

Ch.  9.  But  to  many  their  own  destruction  was  not  sufficient. 
With  mutual  exhortations  the  people  were  urged  to  their  ruin; 
death  was  pledged  by  turns  in  the  deadly  cup.  And  that 
nothing  might  be  wanting  to  aggravate  the  crime,  infants,  also, 
in  the  arms  of  their  parents,  being  either  carried  or  conducted, 
lost,  while  yet  little  ones,  what  in  the  very  beginning  of  their 
nativity  they  had  gained.  Will  not  they,  when  the  day  of 
judgment  comes,  say:  ''We  have  done  nothing;  nor  have  we 
forsaken  the  Lord's  bread  and  cup  to  hasten  freely  to  a 
profane  contract.    .   .   ." 

Ch.  10.  Nor  is  there,  alas,  any  just  and  weighty  reason 
which  excuses  such  a  crime.  One's  country  was  to  be  left, 
and  loss  of  one's  estate  was  to  be  suffered.  Yet  to  whom 
that  is  born  and  dies  is  there  not  a  necessity  at  some  time 
to  leave  his  country  and  to  suffer  loss  of  his  estate?  But  let 
not  Christ  be  forsaken,  so  that  the  loss  of  salvation  and  of 
an  eternal  home  should  be  feared. 

(e)  Cyprian,  De  Lapsis,  28.     (MSL,  4  :  501.) 

Those  who  did  not  actually  sacrifice  in  the  tests  that  were  applied 
to  Christians,  but  by  bribery  had  procured  certificates  that  they 
had  sacrificed,  were  known  as  libellatici.  It  was  to  the  credit  of  the 
Christian  moral  feeling  that  this  subterfuge  was  not  admitted. 


2IO      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Nor  let  those  persons  flatter  themselves  that  they  need 
repent  the  less  who,  although  they  have  not  polluted  their 
hands  with  abominable  sacrifices,  yet  have  defiled  their 
consciences  with  certificates.  That  profession  of  one  who 
denies  is  the  testimony  of  a  Christian  disowning  what  he 
has  been.  He  says  he  has  done  what  another  has  actually 
committed,  and  although  it  is  written,  "Ye  cannot  serve 
two  masters"  [Matt.  6  :  24],  he  has  served  an  earthly  master 
in  that  he  has  obeyed  his  edict;  he  has  been  more  obedient 
to  human  authority  than  to  God. 

(/■)  A  Libellus.     From  a  papyrus  found  at  Fayum. 

The  text  may  be  found  in  Kirch,  n.  207.  This  is  the  actual  certifi- 
cate which  a  man  suspected  of  being  a  Christian  obtained  from  the 
commission  appointed  to  carry  out  the  edict  of  persecution.  It  has 
been  preserved  these  many  centuries  in  the  dry  Egyptian  climate, 
and  is  with  some  others,  which  are  less  perfect,  among  the  most  inter- 
esting relics  of  the  ancient  Church. 

Presented  to  the  Commission  for  the  Sacrifices  in  the  vil- 
lage of  Alexander  Island,  by  Aurelius  Diogenes,  the  son  of 
Satabus,  of  the  village  of  Alexander  Island,  about  seventy- 
two  years  of  age,  with  a  scar  on  the  right  eyebrow. 

I  have  at  other  times  always  offered  to  the  gods  as  well  as 
also  now  in  your  presence,  and  according  to  the  regulations 
have  offered,  sacrificed,  and  partaken  of  the  sacrificial  meal; 
and  I  pray  you  to  attest  this.  Farewell.  I,  Aurelius  Diogenes, 
have  presented  this. 

[In  a  second  hand.] 

I,  Aurehus  Syrus,  testify  as  being  present  that  Diogenes 
sacrificed  with  us. 

[First  hand.] 

First  year  of  the  Emperor  Caesar  Gains  Messius  Quintus 
Trajanus  Decius,  pious,  happy,  Augustus,  2d  day  of  Epi- 
phus.     [June  25,  250.] 

(g)  Cyprian,  Epistula  80  (  =  82).    (MSL,  4  :  442.) 

The  date  of  this  epistle  is  257-258,  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Valerian 
persecution,  a  revival  of  the  Decian.  It  was  therefore  shortly  before 
Cyprian's  death. 


THE  DECIAN-VALERIAN  PERSECUTION     211 

C3^rian  to  his  brother  Successus,  greeting.  The  reason  why 
I  write  to  you  at  once,  dearest  brother,  is  that  all  the  clergy 
are  placed  in  the  heat  of  the  contest  and  are  unable  in  any 
way  to  depart  hence,  for  all  of  them  are  prepared,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  devotion  of  their  mind,  for  divine  and  heavenly 
glory.  But  you  should  know  that  those  have  come  back 
whom  I  sent  to  Rome  to  find  out  and  bring  us  the  truth 
concerning  what  had  in  any  manner  been  decreed  respecting 
us.  For  many,  various,  and  uncertain  things  are  currently 
reported.  But  the  truth  concerning  them  is  as  follows: 
Valerian  has  sent  a  rescript  to  the  Senate,  to  the  effect  that 
bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  should  be  immediately 
punished;  but  that  senators,  men  of  rank,  and  Roman 
knights  should  lose  their  dignity  and  be  deprived  of  their 
property;  and  if,  when  their  property  has  been  taken  away, 
they  should  persist  in  being  Christians,  that  they  should 
then  also  lose  their  heads;  but  that  matrons  should  be  de- 
prived of  their  property  and  banished.  Moreover,  people 
of  Caesar's  household,  who  had  either  confessed  before  or 
should  now  confess,  should  have  their  property  confiscated, 
and  be  sent  in  chains  and  assigned  to  Caesar's  estates.  The 
Emperor  Valerian  also  added  to  his  address  a  copy  of  the 
letters  he  prepared  for  the  presidents  of  the  provinces  coercing 
us.  These  letters  we  are  daily  hoping  will  come,  and  we  are 
waiting,  according  to  the  strength  of  our  faith,  for  the  endur- 
ance of  suffering  and  expecting  from  the  help  and  mercy  of 
the  Lord  the  crown  of  eternal  life.  But  know  that  Sixtus 
was  punished  [i.  e.,  martyred]  in  the  cemetery  on  the  eighth 
day  of  the  ides  of  August,  and  with  him  four  deacons.  The 
prefects  of  the  city,  furthermore,  are  daily  urging  on  this 
persecution;  so  that  if  any  are  presented  to  them  they  are 
punished  and  their  property  confiscated. 

I  beg  that  these  things  be  made  known  by  you  to  the  rest 
of  our  colleagues,  that  everywhere  by  their  exhortations  the 
brotherhood  may  be  strengthened  and  prepared  for  the 
spiritual  conflict,  that  every  one  may  think  less  of  death  than 


212      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

of  immortality,  and  dedicated  to  the  Lord  with  full  faith  and 
courage,  they  may  rejoice  rather  than  fear  in  this  confession, 
wherein  they  know  that  the  soldiers  of  God  and  Christ  are 
not  slain,  but  crowned.  I  bid  you,  dearest  brother,  ever 
farewell  in  the  Lord. 

§  46.  Effects  of  the  Persecution  upon  the  Inner  Life 
OF  THE  Church 

The  persecution  developed  the  popular  opinion  of  the 
superior  sanctity  of  martyrdom.  This  was  itself  no  new 
idea,  having  grown  up  in  the  Church  from  the  time  of  Ignatius 
of  Antioch,  but  it  now  received  new  applications  and  devel- 
opments (a,  h).  See  also  §  42,  d,  and  below  for  problems 
arising  from  the  place  the  martyrs  attempted  to  take  in  the 
organization  of  the  Church  and  the  administration  of  dis- 
cipline. This  claim  of  the  martyrs  was  successfully  overcome 
by  the  bishops,  especially  under  Cyprian's  leadership  and 
example.  But  in  the  administration  of  discipline  there  were 
sure  to  arise  difficulties  and  questions,  e.  g.,  Was  there  a  dis- 
tinction to  be  made  in  favor  of  those  who  had  escaped  without 
actually  sacrificing?  {c).  No  matter  what  poHcy  was  followed 
by  the  bishop,  there  was  the  liability  of  the  rise  of  a  party 
in  opposition  to  him.  If  he  was  strict,  a  party  advocating 
laxity  appeared,  as  in  the  case  of  Felicissimus  at  Carthage; 
if  he  was  milder  in  policy,  a  party  would  call  for  greater  rigor, 
as  in  the  case  of  Novatian  at  Rome  {e). 

Additional  source  material:  Cyprian,  Ep.  39-45,  51  (ANF,  V); 
Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  43,  45. 

(a)  Origen,  Exhortatio  ad  Martyrium,  30,  50.  (MSG,  11  : 
601,  636.) 

An  estimate  of  the  importance  and  value  of  martyrdom. 

The  Exhortation  to  Martyrdom  was  addressed  by  Origen  to  his 
friend  and  patron  Ambrosius,  and  to  Protoctetus,  a  presbyter  of 
Caesarea,  who  were  in  great  danger  during  the  persecution  undertaken 
by  Maximinus  Thrax  (235-238).  It  was  probably  written  in  the  reign 
of  that  Emperor. 


EFFECTS  OF  THE  PERSECUTION  213 

Ch.  30.  We  must  remember  that  we  have  sinned  and  that 
it  is  impossible  to  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins  without  baptism, 
and  that  according  to  the  evangelical  laws  it  is  impossible 
to  be  baptized  a  second  time  with  water  and  the  Spirit  for 
the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  therefore  the  baptism  of  martyr- 
dom is  given  us.  For  thus  it  has  been  called,  as  may  be 
clearly  gathered  from  the  passage:  ''Can  ye  drink  of  the 
cup  that  I  drink  of,  and  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  that 
I  am  baptized  with?"  [Mark  10  :  38].  And  in  another  place 
it  is  said:  ''But  I  have  a  baptism  to  be  baptized  with;  and 
how  am  I  straightened  until  it  be  accompHshed ! "  [Luke  12  : 
50].  For  be  sure  that  just  as  the  expiation  of  the  cross  was 
for  the  whole  world,  it  (the  baptism  of  martyrdom)  is  for  the 
cure  of  many  who  are  thereby  cleansed.  For  as  according  to 
the  law  of  Moses  those  placed  near  the  altar  are  seen  to 
minister  forgiveness  of  sins  to  others  through  the  blood  of 
bulls  and  goats,  so  the  souls  of  those  who  have  suffered  on 
account  of  the  testimony  of  Jesus  are  not  in  vain  near  that 
altar  in  heaven  [cf.  Rev.  6  :  g  J^.],  but  minister  forgiveness  of 
sins  to  those  who  pray.  And  at  the  same  time  we  know  that 
just  as  the  high  priest,  Jesus  Christ,  offered  himself  as  a 
sacrifice,  so  the  priests,  of  whom  He  is  the  high  priest,  offer 
themselves  as  sacrifices,  and  on  account  of  this  sacrifice  they 
are  at  the  altar  as  in  their  proper  place. 

Ch.  50.  Just  as  we  have  been  redeemed  with  the  precious 
blood  of  Christ,  who  received  the  name  that  is  above  every 
name,  so  by  the  precious  blood  of  the  martyrs  will  others  be 
redeemed. 

(b)  Origen,  Homil.  ad  Num.,  X,  2.     (MSG,  12  :  658.) 

Of  Origen's  homilies  on  the  Pentateuch  only  a  few  fragments  of 
the  Greek  text  remain.  We  have  them,  however,  in  a  Latin  transla- 
tion or  paraphrase  made  by  Rufinus.  The  twenty-eight  homilies  on 
Numbers  were  written  after  A.  D.  244. 

Concerning  the  martyrs,  the  Apostle  John  writes  in  the 
Apocalypse  that  the  souls  of  those  who  have  been  slain  for 


214     CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  are  present  at  the  altar;  but  he 
who  is  present  at  the  altar  is  shown  to  perform  the  duties 
of  priest.  But  the  duty  of  a  priest  is  to  make  intercession 
for  the  sins  of  the  people.  Wherefore  I  fear,  lest,  perchance, 
inasmuch  as  there  are  made  no  martyrs,  and  sacrifices  of  saints 
are  not  offered  for  our  sins,  we  will  not  receive  remission  of 
our  sins.  And  therefore  I  fear,  lest  our  sins  remaining  in  us, 
it  may  happen  to  us  what  the  Jews  said  of  themselves,  that 
not  having  an  altar,  nor  a  temple,  nor  priesthood,  and  therefore 
not  offering  sacrifices,  our  sins  remain  in  us,  and  so  no  forgive- 
ness is  obtained.  .  .  .  And  therefore  the  devil,  knowing  that 
remission  of  sins  is  obtained  by  the  passion  of  martyrdom, 
is  not  wilHng  to  raise  pubHc  persecutions  against  us  by  the 
heathen. 

(c)  Cyprian,  Epistula  55,  14  (  =  51).     (MSL,  3  :  805.) 

The  opinion  of  the  Church  as  to  the  lihellatici.  The  date  is  251 
or  252. 

Since  there  is  much  difference  between  those  who  have 
sacrificed,  what  a  want  of  mercy  it  is,  and  how  bitter  is 
the  hardship,  to  associate  those  who  have  received  certificates 
with  those  who  have  sacrificed,  when  he  who  has  received 
the  certificate  may  say,  "I  had  previously  read  and  had  been 
informed  by  the  discourse  of  the  bishop  that  we  ought  not 
to  sacrifice  to  idols,  that  the  servant  of  God  ought  not  to 
worship  images;  and  therefore  that  I  might  not  do  this 
which  is  not  lawful,  when  the  opportunity  of  receiving  a 
certificate  was  offered  (and  I  would  not  have  received  it,  if 
the  opportunity  had  not  been  offered)  I  either  went  or  charged 
some  one  other  person  going  to  the  magistrate  to  say  that 
I  am  a  Christian,  that  I  am  not  allowed  to  sacrifice,  that  I 
cannot  come  to  the  devil's  altars,  and  that  I  will  pay  a 
price  for  this  purpose,  that  I  may  not  do  what  is  not  lawful 
for  me  to  do"!  Now,  however,  even  he  who  is  stained  by  a 
certificate,  after  he  has  learned  from  our  admonitions  that 
he  ought  not  to  have  done  even  this,  and  though  his  hand  is 


EFFECTS   OF  THE   PERSECUTION  215 

pure,  and  no  contact  of  deadly  food  has  polluted  his  lips,  yet 
his  conscience  is  nevertheless  polluted,  weeps  when  he  hears 
us,  and  laments,  and  is  now  admonished  for  the  things 
wherein  he  has  sinned,  and  having  been  deceived,  not  so  much 
by  guilt  as  by  error,  bears  witness  that  for  another  time  he 
is  instructed  and  prepared. 

(d)  Epistula  pads,  Cyprian,  Epistula  16.  (MSL,  4  :  268.) 
Cf.  Kirch,  n.  241. 

This  brief  Letter  of  Peace  is  a  specimen  of  the  forms  that  were  being 
issued  by  the  confessors,  and  which  a  party  in  the  Church  regarded  as 
mandatory  upon  the  bishops.  These  Cyprian  strenuously  and  suc- 
cessfully resisted.    See  also  Cyprian,  Ep.  21,  in  ANF,  V,  299. 

All  the  confessors  to  Cyprian,  pope,^  greeting.  Know  that 
we  all  have  given  peace  to  those  concerning  whom  an  account 
has  been  rendered  you  as  to  what  they  have  done  since  they 
committed  their  sin;  and  we  wish  to  make  this  rescript 
known  through  you  to  the  other  bishops.  We  desire  you  to 
have  peace  with  the  holy  martyrs.  Lucianus  has  written  this, 
there  being  present  of  the  clergy  an  exorcist  and  a  lector. 

(e)  Cyprian,  Epistula  43,  2,  3.     (MSL,  4  :  342.) 

The  schism  of  Felicissimus  was  occasioned  by  the  position  taken 
by  Cyprian  in  regard  to  the  admission  of  the  lapsi  in  the  Decian 
persecution.  But  it  was  at  the  same  time  the  outcome  of  an  opposi- 
tion to  Cyprian  of  longer  standing,  on  account  of  jealousy,  as  he  had 
only  recently  become  a  Christian  when  he  was  made  bishop  of  Carthage. 

Ch.  2.  It  has  appeared  whence  came  the  faction  of  FeHcis- 
simus,  on  what  root  and  by  what  strength  it  stood.  These 
men  supphed  in  a  former  time  encouragements  and  exhorta- 
tions to  confessors,  not  to  agree  with  their  bishop,  not  to 
maintain  the  ecclesiastical  discipline  faithfully  and  quietly, 
according  to  the  Lord's  precepts,  not  to  keep  the  glory  of 
their  confession  with  an  uncorrupt  and  unspotted  mode  of 
life.    And  lest  it  should  have  been  too  little  to  have  corrupted 

1  The  term  papa  is  applied  to  Cyprian  several  times  in  the  extant  episUes 
addressed  to  him. 


2i6      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

the  minds  of  certain  confessors  and  to  have  wished  to  arm  a 
portion  of  our  broken  fraternity  against  God's  priesthood, 
they  have  now  appHed  themselves  with  their  envenomed 
deceitfulness  to  the  ruin  of  the  lapsed,  to  turn  away  from 
the  healing  of  their  wound  the  sick  and  the  wounded,  and 
those  who,  by  the  misfortune  of  their  fall,  are  less  fit  and  less 
able  to  take  stronger  counsels ;  and  having  left  off  prayers  and 
suppHcations,  whereby  with  long  and  continued  satisfaction 
the  Lord  is  to  be  appeased,  they  invite  them  by  the  deceit  of 
a  fallacious  peace  to  a  fatal  rashness. 

Ch.  3.  But  I  pray  you,  brethren,  watch  against  the  snares 
of  the  devil,  and  being  careful  for  your  own  salvation,  guard 
diligently  against  this  deadly  deceit.  This  is  another  perse- 
cution and  another  temptation.  Those  five  presbyters  are 
none  other  than  the  five  leaders  who  were  lately  associated 
with  the  magistrates  in  an  edict  that  they  might  overthrow 
our  faith,  that  they  might  turn  away  the  feeble  hearts  of  the 
brethren  to  their  deadly  nets  by  the  perversion  of  the  truth. 
Now  the  same  scheme,  the  same  overturning,  is  again  brought 
about  by  the  five  presbyters,  linked  with  FeHcissimus,  to  the 
destruction  of  salvation,  that  God  should  not  be  besought, 
and  that  he  who  has  denied  Christ  should  not  appeal  for 
mercy  to  the  same  Christ  whom  he  has  denied;  that  after 
the  fault  of  the  crime  repentance  also  should  be  taken  away; 
and  that  satisfaction  should  not  be  made  through  bishops 
and  priests,  but,  the  Lord's  priests  being  forsaken,  a  new 
tradition  of  sacrilegious  appointment  should  arise  contrary 
to  the  evangelical  discipline.  And  although  it  was  once  ar- 
ranged as  well  by  us  as  by  the  confessors  and  the  clergy  of 
the  city,^  likewise  by  all  the  bishops  located  either  in  our 
province  or  beyond  the  sea  [i.  e.,  Italy],  that  there  should  be 
no  innovations  regarding  the  case  of  the  lapsed  unless  we  all 
assembled  in  one  place,  and  when  our  counsels  had  been 
compared  we  should  then  decide  upon  some  moderate  sen- 

^  7.  c,  Rome.  There  was  a  vacancy  at  that  time,  A.  D.  250,  in  the  episcopate 
of  Rome  and  the  clergy  administered  the  afiairs  of  that  church  sede  vacante. 


EFFECTS   OF  THE   PERSECUTION  217 

tence,  tempered  alike  with  discipline  and  with  mercy; 
against  this,  our  counsel,  they  have  rebelled  and  all  priestly 
authority  has  been  destroyed  by  factious  conspiracies. 

(/■)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  43.    (MSG,  20  :  616.) 

The  schism  of  Novatian  at  Rome  was  occasioned  by  the  question 
of  discipline  of  the  lapsed.  While  the  schism  of  Felicissimus  was 
in  favor  of  more  lenient  treatment  of  those  who  had  fallen,  the  schism 
of  Novatian  was  in  favor  of  greater  strictness.  The  sect  of  Novatians, 
named  after  the  founder,  Novatus  or  Novatianus,  lasted  for  more 
than  two  centuries. 

Novatus  [Novatianus],  a  presbyter  at  Rome,  being  lifted  up 
with  arrogance  against  these  persons,  as  if  there  was  no  longer 
for  them  a  hope  of  salvation,  not  even  if  they  should  do  all 
things  pertaining  to  a  pure  and  genuine  conversion,  became 
the  leader  of  the  heresy  of  those  who  in  the  pride  of  their 
imagination  style  themselves  Cathari.^  Thereupon  a  very 
large  synod  assembled  at  Rome,  of  bishops  in  number  sixty, 
and  a  great  many  more  presbyters  and  deacons;  and  likewise 
the  pastors  of  the  remaining  provinces  deliberated  in  their 
places  by  themselves  concerning  what  ought  to  be  done.  A 
decree,  accordingly,  was  confirmed  by  all  that  Novatus  and 
those  who  joined  with  him,  and  those  who  adopted  his 
brother-hating  and  inhuman  opinion,  should  be  considered 
by  the  Church  as  strangers;  but  that  they  should  heal  such 
of  the  brethren  as  had  fallen  into  misfortune,  and  should  min- 
ister to  them  with  the  medicines  of  repentance.  There  have 
come  down  to  us  epistles  of  CorneHus,  bishop  of  Rome,  to 
Fabius,  of  the  church  at  Antioch,  which  show  what  was  done 
at  the  synod  at  Rome,  and  what  seemed  best  to  all  those  in 
Italy  and  Africa  and  the  regions  thereabout.  Also  other 
epistles,  written  in  the  Latin  language,  of  Cyprian  and  those 
with  him  in  Africa,  by  which  it  is  shown  that  they  agreed  as 
to  the  necessity  of  succoring  those  who  had  been  tempted, 
and  of  cutting  off  from  the  Catholic  Church  the  leader  of 
the  heresy  and  all  that  joined  him. 

^I.  e.,  the  pure  ones. 


2i8      CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 


CHAPTER  IV.     THE  PERIOD  OF  PEACE  FOR  THE 
CHURCH:  A.  D.  260  TO  A.  D.  303 

After  the  Decian- Valerian  persecution  (250-260)  the  Church 
enjoyed  a  long  peace,  rarely  interrupted  anywhere  by  hostile 
measures,  until  the  outbreak  of  the  second  great  general  per- 
secution, under  Diocletian  (303-313),  a  space  of  over  forty 
years.  In  this  period  the  Church  cast  off  the  chiHasm 
which  had  Hngered  as  a  part  of  a  primitive  Jewish  concep- 
tion of  Christianity  (§  47),  and  adapted  itself  to  the  actual 
condition  of  this  present  world.  Under  the  influence  of 
scientific  theology,  especially  that  of  the  Alexandrian  school, 
the  earlier  forms  of  Monarchianism  disappeared  from  the 
Church,  and  the  discussion  began  to  narrow  down  to  the 
position  which  it  eventually  assumed  in  the  Arian  contro- 
versy (§  48).  Corresponding  to  the  development  of  the 
theology  went  that  of  the  cultus  of  the  Church,  and  already 
in  the  West  abiding  characteristics  appeared  (§  49).  The 
cultus  and  the  discipHnary  work  of  the  bishops  advanced  in 
turn  the  hierarchical  organization  of  the  Church  and  the  place 
of  the  bishops  (§  50),  but  the  theory  of  local  episcopal  auton- 
omy and  the  universaHstic  tendencies  of  the  see  of  Rome 
soon  came  into  sharp  conflict  (§  51),  especially  over  the 
validity  of  baptism  administered  by  heretics  (§  52).  In 
this  discussion  the  North  African  Church  assumed  a  position 
which  subsequently  became  the  occasion  of  the  most  serious 
schism  of  the  ancient  Church,  or  Donatism.  In  this  period, 
also,  is  to  be  set  the  rise  of  Christian  Monasticism  as  dis- 
tinguished from  ordinary  Christian  asceticism  (§  53).  At  the 
same  time,  a  dangerous  rival  of  Christianity  appeared  in 
the  East,  in  the  form  of  Manichaeanism,  in  which  were  ab- 
sorbed nearly  all  the  remnants  of  earlier  Gnosticism  (§  54). 

§  47.   The  Chiliastic  Controversy. 

§  48.   Theology  of  the  Second  Half  of  the  Third  Century 
under  the  Influence  of  Origen. 


THE   CHILIASTIC   CONTROVERSY  219 

§  49.   The  Development  of  the  Cultus. 

§  50.   The  Episcopate. 

§  51.   The  Unity  of  the  Church  and  the  See  of  Rome. 

§  52.    Controversy  on  the  Baptism  of  Heretics. 

§  53.   Beginnings  of  Christian  Monasticism. 

§  54.   Manichaeanism. 

§  47.    The  Chiliastic  Controversy 

During  the  third  century  the  behef  in  chihasm  as  a  part 
of  the  Church's  faith  died  out  in  nearly  all  parts  of  the 
Church.  It  did  not  seem  called  for  by  the  condition  of  the 
Church,  which  was  rapidly  adjusting  itself  to  the  world  in 
which  it  found  itself.  The  scientific  theology,  especially  that 
of  Alexandria,  found  no  place  in  its  system  for  such  an  arti- 
cle as  chihasm.  The  belief  lingered,  however,  in  country 
places,  and  with  it  went  no  httle  opposition  to  the  "scientific'* 
exegesis  which  by  means  of  allegory  explained  away  the  prom- 
ises of  a  millennial  kingdom.  The  only  account  we  have  of 
this  so-called  "Chiliastic  Controversy"  is  found  in  connection 
with  the  history  of  the  schism  of  Nepos  in  Egypt  given  by 
Eusebius.  But  it  may  be  safely  assumed  that  the  condition 
of  things  here  described  was  not  peculiar  to  any  one  part  of 
the  Church,  though  an  open  schism  resulting  from  the  con- 
flict of  the  old  and  new  ideas  is  not  found  elsewhere. 

Additional  source  material:  Origen,  De  Principiis,  II,  11  (ANF,  IV); 
Lactantius,  DivmcE.  Institutiones,  VII,  14-26  (ANF,  VII) ;  Methodius, 
Symposium,  IX,  5  (ANF,  VI);   v.  infra,  §  48. 

Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  24.    (MSG,  20  :  693.) 

Dionysius  was  bishop  of  Alexandria  248-265,  after  serving  as  the 
head  of  the  Catechetical  School,  a  position  which  he  does  not  seem 
to  have  resigned  on  being  advanced  to  the  episcopate.  His  work 
On  the  Promises  has,  with  the  exception  of  fragments  preserved  by 
Eusebius,  perished,  as  has  also  the  work  of  Nepos,  Against  the  Alle- 
gorists.  The  date  of  the  work  of  Nepos  is  not  known.  That  of  the 
work  of  Dionysius  is  placed  conjecturally  at  255.  The  "Allegorists," 
against  whom  Nepos  wrote,  were  probably  Origen  and  his  school,  who 
developed  more  consistently  and  scientifically  the  allegorical  method 
of  exegesis;  see  above,  §  43,  k. 


220      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Besides  all  these,  the  two  books  On  the  Promises  were  pre- 
pared by  him  [Dionysius].  The  occasion  of  these  was  Nepos, 
a  bishop  in  Egypt,  who  taught  that  the  promises  made  to 
the  holy  men  in  the  divine  Scriptures  should  be  understood 
in  a  more  Jewish  manner,  and  that  there  would  be  a  certain 
millennium  of  bodily  luxury  upon  this  earth.  As  he  thought 
that  he  could  establish  his  private  opinion  by  the  Revelation 
of  John,  he  wrote  a  book  on  this  subject,  entitled  Refutation 
of  Allegorists.  Dionysius  opposes  this  in  his  books  On  the 
Promises.  In  the  first  he  gives  his  own  opinion  of  the  dogma; 
and  in  the  second  he  treats  of  the  Revelation  of  John,^ 
and,  mentioning  Nepos  at  the  beginning,  writes  of  him  as 
follows : 

''But  since  they  bring  forward  a  certain  work  of  Nepos,  on 

which  they  rely  confidently,  as  if  it  proved  beyond  dispute 

that  there  will  be  a  reign  of  Christ  upon  earth,  I  confess 

that  in  many  other  respects  I  approve  and  love  Nepos  for 

his  faith  and  industry  and  his  diligence  in  the  Scriptures, 

and  for  his  extensive  psalmody  with  which  many  of  the 

brethren  are  still  delighted;   and  I  hold  the  man  in  the  more 

reverence  because  he  has  gone  before  us  to  rest.  .  .  .  But 

as  some  think  his  work  very  plausible,  and  as  certain  teachers 

regard  the  law  and  the  prophets  as  of  no  consequence,  and 

do  not  follow  the  Gospels,  and  treat  lightly  the  apostolic 

epistles,  while  they  make  promises  as  to  the  teaching  of  this 

work  as  if  it  were  some  great  hidden  mystery,  and  do  not 

permit  our  simpler  brethren  to  have  any  sublime  and  lofty 

thoughts  concerning  the  glorious  and  truly  divine  appearing 

of  our  Lord  and  our  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  our  being 

gathered  together  unto  Him,  and  made  Kke  Him,  but,  on  the 

contrary,  lead  them  to  a  hope  for  small  things  and  mortal 

things  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  for  things  such  as  exist 

now — since  this  is  the  case,  it  is  necessary  that  we  should 

^In  the  next  chapter  of  Eusebius  (  =  VII,  25)  there  are  the  critical  reasons 
against  the  apostolic  authorship  of  the  Revelation  of  St.  John,  based  upon  a 
critical  comparison  with  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  John,  reasons 
which  are  still  current  in  radical  critical  circles. 


THEOLOGY  AFTER  ORIGEN  221 

dispute  with  our  brother  Nepos  as  if  he  were  present."    Far- 
ther on  he  says: 

'^  When  I  was  in  the  district  of  Arsinoe,  where,  as  you  know, 
this  doctrine  has  prevailed  for  a  long  time,  so  that  schisms 
and  apostasies  of  entire  churches  have  resulted,  I  called  to- 
gether the  presbyters  and  teachers  of  the  brethren  in  the 
villages — such  brethren  as  wished  being  present — and  I  ex- 
horted them  to  make  a  pubhc  examination  of  this  question. 
Accordingly  when  they  brought  me  this  book,  as  if  it  were  a 
weapon  and  fortress  impregnable,  sitting  with  them  from 
morning  till  evening  for  three  successive  days,  I  endeavored 
to  correct  what  was  written  in  it.  .  .  .  And  finally  the 
author  and  mover  of  this  teaching,  who  was  called  Coracion, 
in  the  hearing  of  all  the  brethren  present  acknowledged  and 
testified  to  us  that  he  would  no  longer  hold  this  opinion,  nor 
discuss  it,  nor  mention  it,  nor  teach  it,  as  he  was  fully  con- 
vinced by  the  arguments  against  it." 

§  48.    Theology  of  the  Second  Half  of  the  Third 
Century  under  the  Influence  of  Origen 

By  the  second  half  of  the  third  century  theology  had  become 
a  speculative  and  highly  technical  science  (a),  and  under  the 
influence  of  Origen,  the  Logos  theology,  as  opposed  to  various 
forms  of  Monarchianism  (b),  had  become  universal.  Under 
this  influence,  Paul  of  Samosata,  reviving  Dynamistic  Monar- 
chianism, modified  it  by  combining  with  it  elements  of  the 
Logos  theology  (c-e).  At  the  same  time  there  was  in 
various  parts  of  the  Church  a  continuation  of  the  Asia  Mi- 
nor theological  tradition,  such  as  had  found  expression  in 
Irenaeus.  A  representative  of  this  theology  was  Methodius 
of  Olympus  (/). 

Additional  source  material:  Athanasius,  De  Sent.  Dionysii  (PNF, 
ser.  II,  vol.  IV). 

(a)  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  Confession  of  Faith.  (MSG, 
46  :  912.) 


222      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  or  the  Wonder-worker,  was  born  about  213 
in  Neo-Caesarea  in  Pontus.  He  studied  under  Origen  at  Caesarea  in 
Palestine  from  233  to  238,  and  became  one  of  the  leading  representa- 
tives of  the  Origenistic  theology,  representing  the  orthodox  develop- 
ment of  that  school,  as  distinguished  from  Paul  of  Samosata  and  Lucian. 

The  following  Confession  of  Faith  is  found  only  in  the  Life  of  Gregory 
Thaumaturgus,  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa.  (MSG,  46  :  909  /.)  Its  gen- 
uineness is  now  generally  admitted;  see  Hahn,  op.  cit.,  §  185.  Accord- 
ing to  a  legend,  it  was  communicated  to  Gregory  in  a  vision  by  St. 
John  on  the  request  of  the  Blessed  Virgin.  It  represents  the  specula- 
tive tendency  of  Origenism  and  current  theology  after  the  rise  of 
the  Alexandrian  school.  It  should  be  noted  that  it  differs  markedly 
from  other  confessions  of  faith  in  not  employing  bibHcal  language. 

There  is  one  God,  the  Father  of  the  living  Word,  His  sub- 
stantive Wisdom,  Power,  and  Eternal  Image,  the  perfect 
Begetter  of  the  perfect  One,  the  Father  of  the  Only  begotten 
Son. 

There  is  one  Lord,  only  One  from  only  One,  God  from  God, 
the  image  and  Hkeness  of  the  Godhead,  the  active  Word, 
The  Wisdom  which  comprehends  the  constitution  of  all  things, 
and  the  Power  which  produced  all  creation;  the  true  Son  of 
the  true  Father,  Invisible  of  Invisible,  and  Incorruptible  of 
Incorruptible,  and  Immortal  of  Immortal,  and  Everlasting 
of  Everlasting. 

And  there  is  one  Holy  Spirit  having  His  existence  from 
God,  and  manifested  by  the  Son  [namely,  to  men],  ^  the 
perfect  likeness  of  the  perfect  Son,  Life  and  Cause  of  the 
living  [the  sacred  Fount],  Sanctity,  Leader  of  sanctification,  in 
whom  is  revealed  God  the  Father,  who  is  over  all  and  in  all, 
and  God  the  Son,  who  is  through  all;  a  perfect  Trinity  ^  not 
divided  nor  differing  in  glory  and  eternity  and  sovereignty. 

There  is,  therefore,  nothing  created  or  subservient  in  the 
Trinity,  nor  introduced  as  if  not  there  before,  but  coming 
afterward;  for  there  never  was  a  time  when  the  Son  was 
lacking  to  the  Father,  nor  the  Spirit  to  the  Son,  but  the  same 
Trinity  is  ever  unvarying  and  unchangeable. 

^  The  bracketed  phrases  are  doubtful. 

2  Gregory  uses  the  term  Trias  for  Trinity  here  and  throughout. 


THEOLOGY  AFTER  ORIGEN  223 

(b)  Athanasius,  De  Sent.  Dionysii,  4,  5,  6,  13-15.    (MSG, 

25  :4^4f;  497/0 

What  has  been  called  the  "Controversy  of  the  two  Dionysii"  was 
in  reality  no  controversy.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  [v.  supra,  §  48] 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  Sabellians  near  Cyrene,  pointing  out  the  distinc- 
tion of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  In  it  he  used  language  which  was,  to 
say  the  least,  indiscreet.  Complaint  was  made  to  Dionysius,  bishop 
of  Rome,  that  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  did  not  hold  the  right  view 
of  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father  and  of  the  divinity  of  the  Son. 
Thereupon,  Dionysius  of  Rome  wrote  to  Dionysius  of  Alexandria. 
In  reply,  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  pointed  out  at  length,  in  a  Refuta- 
tion and  Defence,  his  actual  opinion  on  the  matter  as  a  whole,  rather 
than  as  merely  opposed  to  Modalistic  Monarchianism  or  Sabellian- 
ism.  The  course  of  the  discussion  is  sufficiently  clear  from  the  extracts. 
Athanasius  is  writing  in  answer  to  the  Arians,  who  had  appealed 
to  the  letter  of  Dionysius  in  support  of  their  opinion  that  the  Son 
was  a  creature,  and  that  there  was  when  He  was  not  [v.  infra,  §  63]. 
His  work,  from  which  the  following  extracts  are  taken,  was  written 
between  350  and  354, 

Ch.  4.  They  (the  Arians)  say,  then,  that  in  a  letter  the 
blessed  Dionysius  has  said:  ''The  Son  of  God  is  a  creature 
and  made,  and  not  His  own  by  nature,  but  in  essence  ahen 
from  the  Father,  just  as  the  husbandman  is  from  the  vine,  or 
the  shipbuilder  is  from  the  boat;  for  that,  being  a  creature, 
He  was  not  before  He  came  to  be."  Yes.  He  wrote  it,  and 
we,  too,  admit  that  such  was  his  letter.  But  as  he  wrote  this, 
so  also  he  wrote  very  many  other  epistles,  which  ought  to 
be  read  by  them,  so  that  from  all  and  not  from  one  merely 
the  faith  of  the  man  might  be  discovered. 

Ch.  5.  At  that  time  [i.  e.,  when  Dionysius  wrote  against 
the  Sabelhans]  certain  of  the  bishops  of  Pentapolis  in  Upper 
Libya  were  of  the  opinion  of  SabeUius.  And  they  were  so 
successful  with  their  opinion  that  the  Son  of  God  was  scarcely 
preached  any  longer  in  the  churches.  Dionysius  heard  of 
this,  as  he  had  charge  of  those  churches  (cf.  Canon  6,  Nicaea, 
325;  see  below,  §  72),  and  sent  men  to  counsel  the  guilty  ones 
to  cease  from  their  false  doctrine.  As  they  did  not  cease  but 
waxed  more  shameless  in  their  impiety,  he  was  compelled  to 
meet  their  shameless  conduct  by  writing  the  said  letter  and 


224      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

to  define  from  the  Gospels  the  human  nature  of  the  Saviour, 
in  order  that,  since  those  men  waxed  bolder  in  denying  the 
Son  and  in  ascribing  His  human  actions  to  the  Father,  he 
accordingly,  by  demonstrating  that  it  was  not  the  Father 
but  the  Son  that  was  made  man  for  us,  might  persuade  the 
ignorant  persons  that  the  Father  is  not  the  Son,  and  so  by 
degrees  lead  them  to  the  true  godhead  of  the  Son  and  the 
knowledge  of  the  Father. 

Ch.  6.  ...  If  in  his  writings  he  is  inconsistent,  let  them 
[i.  e.,  the  Arians]  not  draw  him  to  their  side,  for  on  this  assump- 
tion he  is  not  worthy  of  credit.  But  if,  when  he  had  written 
his  letter  to  Ammonius,  and  fallen  under  suspicion,  he  made 
his  defence,  bettering  what  he  had  said  previously,  defending 
himself,  but  not  changing,  it  must  be  evident  that  he  wrote 
what  fell  under  suspicion  by  way  of  '^ accommodation." 

Ch.  13.  The  following  is  the  occasion  of  his  writing  the 
other  letters.  When  Bishop  Dionysius  had  heard  of  the 
affairs  in  Pentapolis  and  had  written  in  zeal  for  religion,  as 
I  have  said,  his  letter  to  Euphranor  and  Ammonius  against 
the  heresy  of  Sabellius,  some  of  the  brethren  belonging  to 
the  Church,  who  held  a  right  opinion,  but  did  not  ask  him  so 
as  to  learn  from  himself  what  he  had  written,  went  up  to 
Rome  and  spake  against  him  in  the  presence  of  his  namesake, 
Dionysius,  bishop  of  Rome.  And  the  latter,  upon  hearing 
it,  wrote  simultaneously  against  the  adherents  of  Sabellius 
and  against  those  who  held  the  same  opinions  for  uttering 
which  Arius  was  cast  out  of  the  Church;  and  he  called  it  an 
equal  and  opposite  impiety  to  hold  with  Sabellius  or  with 
those  who  say  that  the  Word  of  God  is  a  creature,  framed 
and  originated.  And  he  wrote  also  to  Dionysius  [i.  e.,  of 
Alexandria]  to  inform  him  of  what  they  had  said  about  him. 
And  the  latter  straightway  wrote  back  and  inscribed  a  book 
entitled  A  Refutation  and  a  Defence. 

Ch.  14.  ...  In  answer  to  these  charges  he  writes,  after 
certain  prefatory  matter  in  the  first  book  of  the  work  entitled 
A  Refutation  and  a  Defence,  in  the  following  terms: 


THEOLOGY  AFTER  ORIGEN  225 

Ch.  15.  ''For  never  was  there  a  time  when  God  was  not  a 
Father."  And  this  he  acknowledges  in  what  follows,  ''that 
Christ  is  forever,  being  Word  and  Wisdom  and  Power.  For 
it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  God,  having  at  first  no  issue, 
afterward  begat  a  Son.  But  the  Son  has  his  being  not  of 
Himself,  but  of  the  Father." 

(c)  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  27,  29,  30.    (MSG,  25  :  705.) 

The  deposition  of  Paul  of  Samosata. 

The  controversy  concerning  Paul's  doctrinal  views  is  sufficiently- 
set  forth  in  the  extract  from  Eusebius  given  below.  Paul  was  bishop 
of  Antioch  from  about  260  to  26S.  His  works  have  perished,  with 
the  exception  of  a  few  fragments.  The  importance  of  Paul  is  that  in 
his  teaching  is  to  be  found  an  attempt  to  combine  the  Logos  theology 
of  Origen  with  Dynamistic  Monarchianism,  with  results  that  appeared 
later  in  Arianism,  on  the  one  hand,  and  Nestorianism,  it  is  thought, 
on  the  other. 

Ch.  27.  After  Sixtus  had  presided  over  the  church  of 
Rome  eleven  years,  Dionysius,  namesake  of  him  of  Alexan- 
dria, succeeded  him.  About  that  time  Demetrianus  died  in 
Antioch,  and  Paul  of  Samosata  received  that  episcopate. 
As  he  held  low  and  degraded  views  of  Christ,  contrary  to  the 
teaching  of  the  Church,  namely,  that  in  his  nature  He  was 
a  common  man,  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  was  entreated  to 
come  to  the  synod.  But  being  unable  to  come  on  account  of 
age  and  physical  weakness,  he  gave  his  opinion  on  the  subject 
under  consideration  by  a  letter.  But  the  other  pastors  of  the 
churches  assembled  from  all  directions,  as  against  a  despoiler 
of  the  flock  of  Christ,  all  making  haste  to  reach  Antioch. 

Ch.  29.  During  his  [Aurelian's,  270-275]  reign  a  final  synod 
composed  of  a  great  many  bishops  was  held,  and  the  leader 
of  heresy  in  Antioch  was  detected  and  his  false  doctrine 
clearly  shown  before  all,  and  he  was  excommunicated  from 
the  Catholic  Church  under  heaven.  Malchion  especially 
drew  him  out  from  his  hiding-place  and  refuted  him.  He  was 
a  man  learned  also  in  other  matters,  and  principal  of  the 
sophist  school  of  Grecian  learning  in  Antioch ;  yet  on  account 
of  the  superior  nobility  of  his  faith  in  Christ  he  had  been  made 


226      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

a  presbyter  of  that  parish  [i.  e.,  diocese].  This  man,  having 
conducted  a  discussion  with  him,  which  was  taken  down 
by  stenographers,  and  which  we  know  is  still  extant,  was 
alone  able  to  detect  the  man  who  dissembled  and  deceived 
others. 

Ch.  30.  The  pastors  who  had  assembled  about  this  matter 
prepared  by  common  consent  an  epistle  addressed  to  Dio- 
nysius,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  Maximus  of  Alexandria,  and  sent 
it  to  all  the  provinces.  .  .  . 

After  other  things  they  describe  as  follows  the  manner  of 
life  which  he  led:  "Whereas  he  has  departed  from  the  rule 
[i.  e.,  of  faith],  and  has  turned  aside  after  base  and  spurious 
teachings,  it  is  not  necessary — since  he  is  without — that  we 
should  pass  judgment  upon  his  practices:  as  for  instance 
...  in  that  he  is  haughty  and  is  puffed  up,  and  assumes 
worldly  dignities,  preferring  to  be  called  ducenarius  rather 
than  bishop;  and  struts  in  the  market-places,  reading  letters 
and  reciting  them  as  he  walks  in  public,  attended  by  a  body- 
guard, with  a  multitude  preceding  and  following  him,  so  that 
the  faith  is  envied  and  hated  on  account  of  his  pride  and 
haughtiness  of  heart,  ...  or  that  he  violently  and  coarsely 
assails  in  public  the  expounders  of  the  Word  that  have 
departed  this  Hfe,  and  magnifies  himself,  not  as  bishop,  but 
as  a  sophist  and  juggler,  and  stops  the  psalms  to  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  as  being  novelties  and  the  productions  of  mod- 
ern men,  and  trains  women  to  sing  psalms  to  himself  in  the 
midst  of  the  church  on  the  great  day  of  the  passover.  .  .  . 
He  is  unwilling  to  acknowledge  that  the  Son  of  God  came 
down  from  heaven.  (And  this  is  no  mere  assertion,  but  is 
abundantly  proved  from  the  records  which  we  have  sent  you; 
and  not  least  where  he  says,  ^ Jesus  Christ  is  from  below'.) 
.  .  .  And  there  are  the  women,  the  ^suhintroductcBJ'  as  the 
people  of  Antioch  call  them,  belonging  to  him  and  to  the 
presbyters  and  deacons  with  him.  Although  he  knows  and 
has  convicted  these  men,  yet  he  connives  at  this  and  their 
incurable  sins,  in  order  that  they  may  be  bound  to  him,  and 


THEOLOGY  AFTER  ORIGEN  227 

through  fear  for  themselves  may  not  dare  to  accuse  him  for 
his  wicked  words  and  deeds.    ..." 

As  Paul  had  fallen  from  the  episcopate,  as  well  as  from  the 
orthodox  faith,  Domnus,  as  has  been  said,  succeeded  to  the 
service  of  the  church  at  Antioch  [i.  e.,  became  bishop].  But 
as  Paul  refused  to  surrender  the  church  building,  the  Emperor 
Aurelian  was  petitioned;  and  he  decided  the  matter  most 
equitably,  ordering  the  building  to  be  given  to  those  to  whom 
the  bishops  of  Italy  and  of  the  city  of  Rome  should  adjudge 
it.  Thus  this  man  was  driven  out  of  the  Church,  with  ex- 
treme disgrace,  by  the  worldly  power. 

Such  was  Aurehan's  attitude  toward  us  at  that  time;  but 
in  the  course  of  time  he  changed  his  mind  in  regard  to  us,  and 
was  moved  by  certain  advisers  to  institute  a  persecution 
against  us.  And  there  was  great  talk  about  it  everywhere. 
But  as  he  was  about  to  do  it,  and  was,  so  to  speak,  in  the 
very  act  of  signing  the  decrees  against  us,  the  divine  judg- 
ment came  upon  him  and  restrained  him  at  the  very  verge 
of  his  undertaking. 

(d)  Malchion  of  Antioch,  Disputation  with  Paul.  (MSG, 
10  :  247-260.) 

The  doctrine  of  Paul  of  Samosata. 

The  following  fragments  are  from  the  disputation  of  Malchion 
with  Paul  at  the  Council  of  Antioch,  268  [see  extract  from  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec,  VII,  27,  29,  30;  see  above  (c)],  which  Malchion  is  said  to 
have  revised  and  published.  The  passages  may  be  found  also  in 
Routh,  ReliquicB  Sacrce,  second  ed.,  Ill,  300  f.  Fragments  I-III  are 
from  the  work  of  the  Emperor  Justinian,  Contra  Monophysitas;  frag- 
ment IV  is  from  the  work  of  Leontius  of  Byzantium,  Adversus  Nesto- 
rianos  et  Eutychianos. 

I.  The  Logos  became  united  with  Him  who  was  born  of 
David,  who  is  Jesus,  who  was  begotten  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
And  Him  the  Virgin  bore  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  but  God  gen- 
erated that  Logos  without  the  Virgin  or  any  one  else  than 
God,  and  thus  the  Logos  exists. 

II.  The  Logos  was  greater  than  Christ.     Christ  became 


228      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

greater  through  Wisdom,  that  we  might  not  overthrow  the 
dignity  of  Wisdom. 

III.  In  order  that  the  Anointed,  who  was  from  David, 
might  not  be  a  stranger  to  Wisdom,  and  that  Wisdom  might 
not  dwell  so  largely  in  another.  For  it  was  in  the  prophets, 
and  more  in  Moses,  and  in  many  the  Lord  was,  but  more 
also  in  Christ  as  in  a  temple.  For  Jesus  Christ  was  one  and 
the  Logos  was  another. 

IV.  He  who  appeared  was  not  Wisdom,  for  He  could  not 
be  found  in  an  outward  form,  neither  in  the  appearance  of 
a  man;    for  He  is  greater  than  all  things  visible. 

{e)  Paul  of  Samosata,  Orationes  ad  Sabinum,  Routh,  op.  ciL, 
III,  329. 

The  doctrine  of  Paul. 

Paul's  work  addressed  to  Sabinus  has  perished  with  the  exception 
of  a  few  fragments.     See  Routh,  op.  cit. 

I.  Thou  shouldest  not  wonder  that  the  Saviour  had  one 
will  with  God;  for  just  as  nature  shows  us  a  substance  be- 
coming one  and  the  same  out  of  many  things,  so  the  nature 
of  love  makes  one  and  the  same  will  out  of  many  through  a 
manifest  preference. 

II.  He  who  was  born  holy  and  righteous,  having  by  His 
struggle  and  sufferings  overcome  the  sin  of  our  progenitors, 
and  having  succeeded  in  all  things,  was  united  in  character 
to  God,  since  He  had  preserved  one  and  the  same  effort  and 
aim  as  He  for  the  promotion  of  things  that  are  good;  and 
since  He  has  preserved  this  inviolate,  His  name  is  called  that 
above  every  name,  the  prize  of  love  having  been  freely 
bestowed  upon  Him. 

(/")  Epiphanius,  Panarion,  Em.  LXV.    (MSG,  42  :  12.) 

The  doctrine  of  Paul  of  Samosata. 

Epiphanius  was  bishop  of  Salamis,  367-403.  His  works  are  chiefly 
polemical  and  devoted  to  the  refutation  of  all  heresies,  of  which  he 
gives  accounts  at  some  length.     He  is  a  valuable,  though  not  always 


THEOLOGY  AFTER  ORIGEN  229 

tellable,  source  for  many  otherwise  unknown  heresies.  In  the  present 
case  we  have  passages  from  Paul's  own  writings  that  confirm  and 
supplement  the  statements  of  the  hereseologist. 

He  [Paul  of  Samosata]  says  that  God  the  Father  and  the 
Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  are  one  God,  that  in  God  is  always 
His  Word  and  His  Spirit,  as  in  a  man's  heart  is  his  own  rea- 
son; that  the  Son  of  God  does  not  exist  in  a  hypostasis,  but 
in  God  himself.  .  .  .  That  the  Logos  came  and  dwelt  in  Jesus, 
who  was  a  man.  And  thus  he  says  God  is  one,  neither  is  the 
Father  the  Father,  nor  the  Son  the  Son,  nor  the  Holy  Spirit 
the  Holy  Spirit,  but  rather  the  one  God  is  Father  and  in  Him 
is  his  Son,  as  the  reason  is  in  a  man.  .  .  .  But  he  did  not 
say  with  Noetus  that  the  Father  suffered,  but  only,  said  he, 
the  Logos  came  and  energized  and  went  back  to  the  Father. 

(g)  Methodius  of  Olympus,  Symposium,  III,  4,  8.  (MSG, 
18  :  65,  73.) 

The  theology  of  Origen  was  not  suffered  to  go  without  being  chal- 
lenged by  those  who  could  not  accept  some  of  his  extreme  statements. 
Among  those  opposed  to  him  were  Peter,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  and 
Methodius,  bishop  of  Olympus.  Both  were  strongly  influenced  by 
Origen,  but  the  denial  of  a  bodily  resurrection  and  the  eternity  of 
the  creation  were  too  offensive.  The  more  important  of  the  two  is 
Methodius,  who  combined  a  strong  anti-Origenistic  position  on  these 
two  points  with  that  "recapitulation"  theory  of  redemption  which 
has  been  called  the  Asia  Minor  type  of  theology  and  is  represented 
also  by  Irenaeus;  see  above,  §  27.  He  has  been  called  the  author  of 
the  "theology  of  the  future,"  with  reference  to  his  relation  to  Atha- 
nasius,  in  that  he  laid  the  foundation  for  a  doctrine  of  redemption 
which  superseded  that  of  the  old  Alexandrian  school,  and  became  es- 
tablished in  the  East  under  the  lead  of  Athanasius  and  the  Nicene 
divines  generally. 

Methodius  was  bishop  of  Olympus,  in  Lycia.  The  statements  that 
he  also  held  other  sees  are  unreliable.  He  died  in  311  as  a  martyr. 
Nothing  else  is  known  with  certainty  as  to  his  life.  Of  his  numerous 
and  well-written  works,  only  one,  The  Banquet,  or  Symposium,  has 
been  preserved  entire.  His  work  On  the  Resurrection  is  most  strongly 
opposed  to  Origen  and  his  denial  of  the  bodily  resurrection. 

Ch.  4.  For  let  us  consider  how  rightly  he  [Paul]  compared 
Adam  to  Christ,  not  only  considering  him  to  be  the  type  and 


230     CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

image,  but  also  that  Christ  Himself  became  the  very  same 
thing,  because  the  Eternal  Word  fell  upon  Him.  For  it  was 
fitting  that  the  first-born  of  God,  the  first  shoot,  the  Only 
begotten,  even  the  Wisdom  [of  God],  should  be  joined  to  the 
first-formed  man,  and  first  and  first-born  of  men,  and  should 
become  incarnate.  And  this  was  Christ,  a  man  filled  with 
the  pure  and  perfect  Godhead,  and  God  received  into  man. 
For  it  was  most  suitable  that  the  oldest  of  the  ^Eons  and  the 
first  of  the  archangels,  when  about  to  hold  communion  with 
men,  should  dwell  in  the  oldest  and  first  of  men,  even  Adam. 
And  thus,  renovating  those  things  which  were  from  the 
beginning,  and  forming  them  again  of  the  Virgin  by  the  Spirit, 
He  frames  the  same  just  as  at  the  beginning. 

Ch.  8.  The  Church  could  not  conceive  behevers  and  give 
them  new  birth  by  the  laver  of  regeneration  unless  Christ, 
emptying  Himself  for  their  sakes,  that  He  might  be  contained 
by  them,  as  I  said,  through  the  recapitulation  of  His  passion, 
should  die  again,  coming  down  from  heaven,  and,  being  "joined 
to  His  wife,"  the  Church,  should  provide  that  a  certain 
power  be  taken  from  His  side,  so  that  all  who  are  built  up  in 
Him  should  grow  up,  even  those  who  are  born  again  by  the 
laver,  receiving  of  His  bones  and  of  His  flesh;  that  is,  of  His 
hohness  and  of  His  glory.  For  he  who  says  that  the  bones 
and  flesh  of  Wisdom  are  understanding  and  virtue,  says  most 
rightly;  and  that  the  side  [rib]  is  the  Spirit  of  truth,  the 
Paraclete,  of  whom  the  illuminated  [i.  e.j  baptized],  receiving, 
are  fitly  born  again  to  incorruption. 

(h)  Methodius  of  Olympus,  De  Resurrect.,  I,  13.  (MSG, 
18  :  284.) 

De  Resur.,  1, 13.^  If  any  one  were  to  think  that  the  earthly 
image  is  the  flesh  itself,  but  the  heavenly  image  is  some  other 
spiritual  body  besides  the  flesh,  let  him  first  consider  that 
Christ,  the  heavenly  man,  when  He  appeared,  bore  the  same 
form  of  limbs  and  the  same  image  of  flesh  as  ours,  through 

^  On  the  whole  passage,  cf.  I  Cor.  15  :  42_^. 


THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  CULTUS   231 

which,  also,  He,  who  was  not  man,  became  man,  that,  ''as  in 
Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  For 
if  it  was  not  that  he  might  set  the  flesh  free  and  raise  it  up 
that  He  bore  flesh,  why  did  He  bear  flesh  superfluously,  as 
He  purposed  neither  to  save  it  nor  to  raise  it  up?  But  the 
Son  of  God  does  nothing  superfluous.  He  did  not  take,  then, 
the  form  of  a  servant  uselessly,  but  to  raise  it  up  and  save  it. 
For  He  was  truly  made  man,  and  died,  and  not  in  appearance, 
but  that  He  might  truly  be  shown  to  be  the  first  begotten 
from  the  dead,  changing  the  earthly  into  the  heavenly,  and 
the  mortal  into  the  immortal. 


§  49.  The  Development  of  the  Cultus 

The  Church's  cultus  and  sacramental  system  developed 
rapidly  in  the  third  century.  The  beginnings  of  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments  according  to  prescribed  forms  are 
to  be  traced  to  the  Didache  and  Justin  Martyr  (see  above, 
§§  13,  14).  At  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  baptism 
was  already  accompanied  by  a  series  of  subsidiary  rites,  and 
the  eucharist  was  regarded  as  a  sacrifice,  the  benefit  of  which 
might  be  directed  toward  specific  ends.  The  further  devel- 
opment was  chiefly  in  connection  with  the  eucharist,  which  ef- 
fected in  turn  the  conception  of  the  hierarchy  (see  below, 
§  50).  Baptism  was  regarded  as  conferring  complete  remission 
of  previous  sins ;  subsequent  sins  were  atoned  for  in  the  peni- 
tential discipHne  (see  above,  §  42).  As  for  the  eucharist,  the 
conception  of  the  sacrifice  which  appears  in  the  Didache,  an 
offering  of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  gradually  gives  place  to 
a  sacrifice  which  in  some  way  partakes  of  the  nature  of 
Christ's  sacrificial  death  upon  the  cross.  At  the  same  time, 
the  elements  are  more  and  more  completely  identified  with  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  nature  of  the  presence  of 
Christ  is  conceived  under  quasi-physical  categories.  As  rep- 
resentatives of  the  lines  of  development,  Tertullian,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  century,  and  Cyprian,  at  the  middle,  may 


232      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

be  taken.  That  a  similar  development  took  place  in  the  East 
is  evident,  not  only  from  the  references  to  the  same  in  the 
writings  of  Origen  and  others,  but  also  from  the  appearance  in 
the  next  century  of  elaborate  services,  or  liturgies,  as  well  as 
the  doctrinal  statements  of  writers  generally. 

(a)  Tertullian,  De  Corona,  3.    (MSL,  2  :  98.) 
The  ceremonies  connected  with  baptism. 

And  how  long  shall  we  draw  the  saw  to  and  fro  through 
this  line  when  we  have  an  ancient  practice  which  by  anticipa- 
tion has  settled  the  state  of  the  question?  If  no  passage  of 
Scripture  has  prescribed  it,  assuredly  custom,  which  without 
doubt  flowed  from  tradition,  has  confirmed  it.  For  how  can 
anything  come  into  use  if  it  has  not  first  been  handed  down? 
Even  in  pleading  tradition  written  authority,  you  say,  must 
be  demanded.  Let  us  inquire,  therefore,  whether  tradition, 
unless  it  be  written,  should  not  be  admitted.  Certainly  we 
shall  say  that  it  ought  not  to  be  admitted  if  no  cases  of 
other  practices  which,  without  any  written  instrument,  we 
maintain  on  the  ground  of  tradition  alone,  and  the  counte- 
nance thereafter  of  custom,  affords  us  any  precedent.  To 
deal  with  this  matter  briefly,  I  shall  begin  with  baptism. 
When  we  are  going  to  enter  the  water,  but  a  little  before, 
in  the  church  and  under  the  hand  of  the  president,  we  sol- 
emnly profess  that  we  renounce  the  devil,  and  his  pomp,  and 
his  angels.  Hereupon  we  are  thrice  immersed,  making  a 
somewhat  ampler  pledge  than  the  Lord  has  appointed  in 
the  Gospel.  Then,  when  we  are  taken  up  (as  new-born  chil- 
dren), we  taste  first  of  all  a  mixture  of  milk  and  honey;  and 
from  that  day  we  refrain  from  the  daily  bath  for  a  whole 
week.  We  take  also  in  congregations,  before  daybreak,  and 
from  the  hands  of  none  but  the  presidents,  the  sacrament  of 
the  eucharist,  which  the  Lord  both  commanded  to  be  eaten 
at  meal-times,  and  by  all.  On  the  anniversary  day  we  make 
offerings  for  the  dead  as  birthday  honors.  We  consider  fast- 
ing on   the  Lord's  Day  to  be  unlawful,  as  also  to  worship 


i 


THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  CULTUS   233 

kneeling.  We  rejoice  in  the  same  privilege  from  Easter  to 
Pentecost.  We  feel  pained  should  any  wine  or  bread,  even 
though  our  own,  be  cast  upon  the  ground.  At  every  forward 
step  and  movement,  at  every  going  in  and  going  out,  when 
we  put  on  our  shoes,  at  the  bath,  at  table,  on  lighting  the 
lamps,  on  couch,  on  seat,  in  all  the  ordinary  actions  of  daily 
life,  we  trace  upon  the  forehead  the  sign  [i.  e.,  of  the  cross]. 

(b)  Tertullian,  De  Baptismo,  5-8.     (MSL,  i  :  13 14.) 

The  whole  passage  should  be  read  as  showing  clearly  that  Ter- 
tullian recognized  the  similarity  between  Christian  baptism  and 
heathen  purifying  washings,  but  referred  the  effects  of  the  heathen 
rites  to  evil  powers,  quite  in  harmony  with  the  Christian  admission 
of  the  reality  of  heathen  divinities  as  evil  powers  and  heathen  exor- 
cisms as  wrought  by  the  aid  of  evil  spirits. 

Ch.  5.  ...  Thus  man  will  be  restored  by  God  to  His 
likeness,  for  he  formerly  had  been  after  the  image  of  God; 
the  image  is  counted  being  in  His  form  [in  effigie],  the  likeness 
in  His  eternity  [in  CBternitate].  For  he  receives  that  Spirit  of 
God  which  he  had  then  received  from  His  afflatus,  but  after- 
ward lost  through  sin. 

Ch.  6.  Not  that  in  the  waters  we  obtain  the  Holy  Spirit, 
but  in  the  water,  under  (the  witness  of  angels)  we  are  cleansed 
and  prepared  for  the  Holy  Spirit.  .  .  . 

Ch.  7.  After  this,  when  we  have  issued  from  the  font,  we 
are  thoroughly  anointed  with  a  blessed  unction  according  to 
the  ancient  discipHne,  wherein  on  entering  the  priesthood 
men  were  accustomed  to  be  anointed  with  oil  from  a  horn, 
wherefore  Aaron  was  anointed  by  Moses.  .  .  .  Thus,  too, 
in  our  case  the  unction  runs  carnally,  but  profits  spiritually; 
in  the  same  way  as  the  act  of  baptism  itself  is  carnal,  in  that 
we  are  plunged  in  the  water,  but  the  effect  spiritual,  in  that 
we  are  freed  from  sins. 

Ch.  8.  In  the  next  place,  the  hand  is  laid  upon  us,  invoking 
and  inviting  the  Holy  Spirit  through  benediction.  .  .  .  But 
this,  as  well  as  the  former,  is  derived  from  the  old  sacramental 
rite  in  which  Jacob  blessed  his  grandsons  born  of  Joseph, 


234      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Ephraim,  and  Manasses;  with  his  hands  laid  on  them  and 
interchanged,  and  indeed  so  transversely  slanted  the  one  over 
the  other  that,  by  delineating  Christ,  they  even  portended  the 
future  benediction  in  Christ.    [Cf.  Gen.  48  :  13  /.] 

'  (c)  Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  CcBciliunij  Ep.  6^,,  13-17.  (MSL, 
4  •  395-) 

The  eucharist. 

Thascius  Caecilius  Cyprianus,  bishop  of  Carthage,  was  born  about 
200,  and  became  bishop  in  248  or  249.  His  doctrinal  position  is  a 
development  of  that  of  Tertullian,  beside  whom  he  may  be  placed 
as  one  of  the  founders  of  the  characteristic  theology  of  North  Africa. 
His  discussion  of  the  place  and  authority  of  the  bishop  in  the  ecclesias- 
tical system  was  of  fundamental  importance  in  the  development  of 
the  theory  of  the  hierarchy,  though  it  may  be  questioned  whether 
his  particular  theory  of  the  relation  of  the  bishops  to  each  other  ever 
was  realized  in  the  Church.  For  his  course  during  the  Decian  perse- 
cution see  §§  45,  46.  He  died  about  258,  in  the  persecution  under 
Valerian. 

In  the  epistle  from  which  the  following  extract  is  taken  Cyprian 
writes  to  Csecihus  to  point  out  that  it  is  wrong  to  use  merely  water  in 
the  eucharist,  and  that  wine  mixed  with  water  should  be  used,  for  in 
all  respects  we  do  exactly  what  Christ  did  at  the  Last  Supper  when  he 
instituted  the  eucharist.  In  the  course  of  the  letter,  which  is  of  some 
length,  Cyprian  takes  occasion  to  set  forth  his  conception  of  the 
eucharistic  sacrifice,  which  is  a  distinct  advance  upon  Tertullian. 
The  date  of  the  letter  is  about  253. 

Ch.  13.  Because  Christ  bore  us  all,  in  that  He  also  bore 
our  sins,  we  see  that  in  the  water  is  understood  the  people, 
but  in  the  wine  is  showed  the  blood  of  Christ.  But  when 
in  the  cup  the  water  is  mingled  with  the  wine  the  people  is 
made  one  with  Christ,  and  the  assembly  of  believers  is  associ- 
ated and  conjoined  with  Him  on  whom  it  beheves;  which 
association  and  conjunction  of  water  and  wine  is  so  mingled 
in  the  Lord's  cup  that  that  mixture  cannot  be  separated 
any  more.  Whence,  moreover,  nothing  can  separate  the 
Church— that  is,  the  people  estabHshed  in  the  Church, 
faithfully  and  firmly  continuing  in  that  in  which  they  have 
believed — from  Christ  in  such  a  way  as  to  prevent  their 
undivided  love  from  always  abiding  and  adhering.     Thus, 


THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  CULTUS   235 

therefore,  in  consecrating  the  cup  water  alone  should  not 
be  o£fered  to  the  Lord,  even  as  wine  alone  should  not  be 
offered.  For  if  wine  only  is  offered,  the  blood  of  Christ 
begins  to  be  without  us.^  But  if  the  water  alone  be  offered, 
the  people  begin  to  be  without  Christ,  but  when  both  are 
mingled  and  are  joined  to  each  other  by  an  intermixed  union, 
then  the  spiritual  and  heavenly  sacrament  is  completed. 
Thus  the  cup  of  the  Lord  is  not,  indeed,  water  alone,  nor 
wine  alone,  nor  unless  each  be  mingled  with  the  other;  just 
as,  on  the  other  hand,  the  body  of  the  Lord  cannot  be  flour 
alone  or  water  alone,  nor  unless  both  should  be  united  and 
joined  together  and  compacted  into  the  mass  of  one  bread: 
in  which  sacrament  our  people  are  shown  to  be  one;  so  that 
in  like  manner  as  many  grains  are  collected  and  ground 
and  mixed  together  into  one  mass  and  made  one  bread, 
so  in  Christ,  who  is  the  heavenly  bread,  we  may  know  that 
there  is  one  body  with  which  our  number  is  joined  and 
united. 

Ch.  14.  There  is,  then,  no  reason,  dearest  brother,  for  any 
one  to  think  that  the  custom  of  certain  persons  is  to  be  fol- 
lowed, who  in  times  past  have  thought  that  water  alone 
should  be  offered  in  the  cup  of  the  Lord.  For  we  must  inquire 
whom  they  themselves  have  followed.  For  if  in  the  sacrifice 
which  Christ  offered  none  is  to  be  followed  but  Christ,  we 
ought  certainly  to  obey  and  do  what  Christ  did,  and  what  He 
commanded  to  be  done,  since  He  himself  says  in  the  Gospel; 
*'If  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command  you,  henceforth  I  call  you 
not  servants,  but  friends"  [John  15  :  14  /.].  .  .  .  If  Jesus 
Christ,  our  Lord  and  God,  is  Himself  the  chief  priest  of  God 
the  Father,  and  has  first  offered  Himself  a  sacrifice  to  the 
Father,  and  has  commanded  this  to  be  done  in  commemoration 
of  Himself,  certainly  that  priest  truly  acts  in  the  place  of 
Christ  who  imitates  what  Christ  did;  and  he  then  offers  a 
true  and  full  sacrifice  in  the  Church  of  God  to  God  the  Father 

^  Sanguis  Christi  incipit  esse  sine  nobis.  Paschasius  Radbertus  quotes  this, 
De  corpore  et  sanguine  Domini,  ch.  11,  MSL,  120  :  1308. 


236      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

when  he  proceeds  to  offer  it  according  to  what  he  sees  Christ 
himself  to  have  offered. 

Ch.  15.  But  the  discipline  of  all  religion  and  truth  is  over- 
turned unless  what  is  spiritually  prescribed  be  faithfully 
observed;  unless,  indeed,  any  one  should  fear  in  the  morning 
sacrifices  lest  the  taste  of  wine  should  be  redolent  of  the  blood 
of  Christ.^  Therefore,  thus  the  brotherhood  is  beginning  to 
be  kept  back  from  the  passion  of  Christ  in  persecutions  by 
learning  in  the  offerings  to  be  disturbed  concerning  His  blood 
and  His  blood-shedding.  ...  But  how  can  we  shed  our  blood 
for  Christ  who  blush  to  drink  the  blood  of  Christ? 

Ch.  16.  Does  any  one  perchance  flatter  himself  with  this 
reflection — that,  although  in  the  morning  water  alone  is  seen 
to  be  offered,  yet  when  we  come  to  supper  we  offer  the  min- 
gled cup?  But  when  we  sup,  we  cannot  call  the  people  to- 
gether for  our  banquet  that  we  may  celebrate  the  truth  of 
the  sacrament  in  the  presence  of  the  entire  brotherhood. 
But  still  it  was  not  in  the  morning,  but  after  supper  that  the 
Lord  offered  the  mingled  cup.  Ought  we,  then,  to  celebrate 
the  Lord's  cup  after  supper,  that  so  by  continual  repetition 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  we  may  offer  the  mingled  cup?  It  was 
necessary  that  Christ  should  offer  about  the  evening  of  the 
day,  that  the  very  hour  of  sacrifice  might  show  the  setting 
and  the  evening  of  the  world  as  it  is  written  in  Exodus: 
''And  all  the  people  of  the  synagogue  of  the  children  of 
Israel  shall  kill  it  in  the  evening."  ^  And  again  in  the  Psalms: 
"Let  the  hfting  up  of  my  hands  be  an  evening  sacrifice."  ^ 
But  we  celebrate  the  resurrection  of  the  Lord  in  the  morn- 
ing. 

Ch.  17.  And  because  we  make  mention  of  His  passion  in 
all  sacrifices  (for  the  Lord's  passion  is  the  sacrifice  which  we 
offer),  we  ought  to  do  nothing  else  than  what  He  did.  For 
the  Scripture  says:  "For  as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and 

^  Reference  to  the  possibility  of  detecting  Christians  in  times  of  persecu- 
tion by  the  odor  of  wine  which  they  had  received  in  the  eucharist  early  in  the 
morning. 
2  Ex.  12  :  6.  3  Psalm.  141  :  2. 


THE  EPISCOPATE   IN  THE   CHURCH         237 

drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  till  He 
come."  ^  As  often,  therefore,  as  we  offer  the  cup  in  commem- 
oration of  the  Lord  and  His  passion,  let  us  do  what  it  is 
known  the  Lord  did. 

§  50.    The  Episcopate  in  the  Church 

The  greatest  name  connected  with  the  development  of  the 
hierarchical  conception  of  the  Church  in  the  third  century 
is  without  question  Cyprian  (see  §  49).  He  developed  the 
conception  of  the  episcopate  beyond  the  point  it  had  reached 
in  the  hands  of  Tertullian,  to  whom  the  institution  was 
important  primarily  as  a  guardian  of  the  deposit  of  faith  and 
a  pledge  of  the  continuity  of  the  Church.  In  the  hands  of 
Cyprian  the  episcopate  became  the  essential  foundation  of 
the  Church.  According  to  his  theory  of  the  office,  every 
bishop  was  the  peer  of  every  other  bishop  and  had  the  same 
duties  to  his  diocese  and  to  the  Church  as  a  whole  as  every 
other  bishop.  No  bishop  had  any  more  than  a  moral  au- 
thority over  any  other.  Only  the  whole  body  of  bishops,  or 
the  council,  could  bring  anything  more  than  moral  authority 
to  bear  upon  an  offending  prelate.  The  constitution  of  the 
council  was  not  as  yet  defined.  In  several  points  the  eccle- 
siastical theories  of  Cyprian  were  not  followed  by  the  Church 
as  a  whole,  notably  his  opinion  regarding  heretical  baptism 
(see  §  47),  but  his  main  contention  as  to  the  importance  of 
the  episcopate  for  the  very  existence  {esse),  and  not  the  mere 
welfare  {bene  esse),  of  the  Church  was  universally  accepted. 
His  theory  of  the  equahty  of  all  bishops  was  a  survival  of 
an  earlier  period,  and  represented  httle  more  than  his  per- 
sonal ideal.  The  following  sections  should  also  be  consulted 
in  this  connection. 

Additional  source  material:  Cyprian  deals  with  the  hierarchical 
constitution  in  almost  every  epistle;  see,  however,  especially  the  fol- 
lowing:    26  :  I  [33  :  i],  51  :  24  [55  :  24],  54  :  5  [59  :  Sl  64  :  3  is  '•  sl 

ij  Cor.  II  :  26. 


238      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

72  :  21  [73  :  21],  74  :  16  [75  :  16]  (important  for  the  testimony  of  Fir- 
milian  as  to  the  hierarchical  ideas  in  the  East).  Serapion's  Prayer 
Book,  trans,  by  J.  Wordsworth,  1899. 

(a)  Cyprian,  Epistula  68,  8  [  =  66].     (MSL,  4  :  418.) 

Although  a  rebellious  and  arrogant  multitude  of  those  who 
will  not  obey  depart,  yet  the  Church  does  not  depart  from 
Christ;  and  they  are  the  Church  who  are  a  people  united  to 
the  priest,  and  the  flock  which  adheres  to  its  pastor.  Whence 
you  ought  to  know  that  the  bishop  is  in  the  Church  and  the 
Church  in  the  bishop;  and  that  if  any  one  be  not  with  the 
bishop,  he  is  not  in  the  Church,  and  that  those  flatter  them- 
selves in  vain  who  creep  in,  not  having  peace  with  God's 
priests,  and  think  that  they  communicate  secretly  with  some; 
while  the  Church,  which  is  CathoKc  and  one,  is  not  cut  nor 
divided,  but  is  indeed  connected  and  bound  together  by  the 
cement  of  the  priests  who  cohere  with  one  another. 

(b)  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  256.     (MSL,  3  :  1092.) 

The  council  of  Carthage,  in  256,  was  held,  under  the  presidency  of 
Cyprian,  to  act  on  the  question  of  baptism  by  heretics.  See  §  52. 
Eighty-seven  bishops  were  present.  The  full  report  of  proceedings  is 
to  be  found  in  the  works  of  Cyprian.  See  ANF,  V,  565,  and  Hefele, 
§  6.  The  theory  of  Cyprian  which  is  here  expressed  is  that  all 
bishops  are  equal  and  independent,  as  opposed  to  the  Roman  posi- 
tion taken  by  Stephen,  and  that  the  individual  bishop  is  responsible 
only  to  God. 

Cyprian  said:  ...  It  remains  that  upon  this  matter  each 
of  us  should  bring  forward  what  he  thinks,  judging  no  man, 
nor  rejecting  from  the  right  of  communion,  if  he  should  think 
differently.  For  neither  does  any  one  of  us  set  himself  up 
as  a  bishop  of  bishops,  nor  by  tyrannical  terrors  does  any  one 
compel  his  colleagues  to  the  necessity  of  obedience;  since 
every  bishop,  according  to  the  allowance  of  his  Hberty  and 
power,  has  his  own  proper  right  of  judgment,  and  can  no 
more  be  judged  by  another  than  he  himself  can  judge  another. 
But  let  us  all  wait  for  the  judgment  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 


THE   EPISCOPATE   IN  THE   CHURCH         239 

who  alone  has  the  power  of  advancing  us  in  the  government 
of  His  Church,  and  of  judging  us  in  our  conduct  here. 

(c)  Cyprian,  Epistula  67  :  5.     (MSL,  3  :  1064.) 

The  following  epistle  was  written  to  clergy  and  people  in  Spain, 
i.  e.,  at  Leon,  Astorga,  and  Merida,  in  regard  to  the  ordination  of  two 
bishops,  Sabinus  and  Felix,  in  place  of  Basilides  and  Martial,  who 
had  lapsed  in  the  persecution  and  had  been  deprived  of  their  sees. 
The  passage  illustrates  the  methods  of  election  and  ordination  of 
bishops,  and  the  failure  of  Cyprian,  with  his  theory  of  the  episcopate, 
to  recognize  in  the  see  of  Rome  any  jurisdiction  over  other  bishops. 
Its  date  appears  to  be  about  257. 

You  must  diligently  observe  and  keep  the  practice  deliv- 
ered from  divine  tradition  and  apostolic  observance,  which  is 
also  maintained  among  us,  and  throughout  almost  all  the 
provinces:  that  for  the  proper  celebration  of  ordinations  all 
the  neighboring  bishops  of  the  same  province  should  assemble 
with  that  people  for  which  a  prelate  is  ordained.  And  the 
bishops  should  be  chosen  in  the  presence  of  the  people,  who 
have  most  fully  known  the  Hfe  of  each  one,  and  have  looked 
into  the  doings  of  each  one  as  respects  his  manner  of  life. 
And  this  also,  we  see,  was  done  by  you  in  the  ordination  of  our 
colleague  Sabinus;  so  that,  by  the  suffrage  of  the  whole  broth- 
erhood, and  by  the  sentence  of  the  bishops  who  had  assembled 
in  their  presence,  and  who  had  written  letters  to  you  con- 
cerning him,  the  episcopate  was  conferred  upon  him,  and 
hands  were  imposed  on  him  in  the  place  of  Basilides.  Neither 
can  an  ordination  properly  completed  be  annulled,  so  that 
Basilides,  after  his  crimes  had  been  discovered  and  his  con- 
science made  bare,  even  by  his  own  confession,  might  go  to 
Rome  and  deceive  Stephen,  our  colleague,  who  was  placed 
at  a  distance  and  was  ignorant  of  what  had  been  done,  so  as 
to  bring  it  about  that  he  might  be  replaced  unjustly  in  the 
episcopate  from  which  he  had  been  justly  deposed. 


240      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 


§51.   The  Unity  of  the  Church  and  the  See  of  Rome 

In  the  middle  of  the  third  century  there  were  in  sharp  con- 
flict two  distinct  and  opposed  theories  of  Church  unity: 
the  theory  that  the  unity  was  based  upon  adherence  to  and 
comformity  with  the  see  of  Peter;  and  the  theory  that  the 
episcopate  was  itself  one,  and  that  each  bishop  shared  equally 
in  it.  The  unity  was  either  in  one  see  or  in  the  less  tangible 
unity  of  an  order  of  the  hierarchy.  The  former  was  the 
theory  of  the  Roman  bishops ;  the  latter,  the  theory  of  Cyprian 
of  Carthage,  and  possibly  of  a  number  of  other  ecclesiastics 
in  North  Africa  and  Asia  Minor.  Formerly  polemical  the- 
ology made  the  study  of  this  point  difficult,  at  least  with 
anything  like  impartiality.  In  the  passage  given  below  from 
Cyprian's  treatise  On  the  Unity  of  the  Catholic  Church  the 
text  of  the  Jesuit  Father  Kirch  is  followed  in  the  most  difficult 
and  interpolated  chapter  4.  As  Father  Kirch  gives  the  text 
it  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  theory  of  Cyprian  as  he  has 
elsewhere  stated  it,  and  that  the  interpolated  text  is  not. 
See,  however,  P.  Battifol,  Primitive  Catholicism,  Lond., 
191 1,  Excursus  E. 

Additional  source  material:  V.  supra,  §  27;  also  Mirbt,  §§  56-69. 
The  little  treatise  De  Aleatorihus  (MSL,  4  :  827),  from  which  Mirbt 
gives  an  extract  (n.  71),  might  be  cited  in  this  connection,  but  its  force 
depends  upon  its  origin.  It  is  wholly  uncertain  that  it  was  written 
either  by  a  bishop  of  Rome  or  in  Italy.  C/.  Bardenhewer.  Kirch  also 
gives  the  text  in  part,  n.  276;   for  other  references,  see  Kirch. 

(a)  Cyprian,  De  Catholiccd  Ecclesice  Unitate,  4,  5.    (MSL, 

4  :  513-) 

The  tract  entitled  On  the  Unity  of  the  Catholic  Church  is  the  most 
famous  of  Cyprian's  works.  As  the  theory  there  developed  is  opposed 
to  that  which  became  dominant,  and  as  Cyprian  was  regarded  as  the 
great  upholder  of  the  Church's  constitution,  interpolations  were  early 
made  in  the  text  which  seriously  distort  the  sense.  These  interpolations 
are  to-day  abandoned  by  all  scholars.  The  best  critical  edition  of  the 
works  of  Cyprian  is  by  W.  von  Hartel  in  the  CSEL,  but  critical  texts 
of  the  following  passage  with  references  to  Hterature  and  indication  of 
interpolations  may  be  found  in  Mirbt  (Prot.),  n.  52,  and  in  Kirch 
(R.  C.),  n.  234  (chapter  4  only). 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE   CHURCH  241 

Ch.  4.  The  Lord  speaks  to  Peter,  saying:  '^I  say  unto 
thee,  that  thou  art  Peter;  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  Church  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it. 
I  will  give  thee  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven;  and 
whatsoever  thou  shaft  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  also  in 
heaven;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be 
loosed  also  in  heaven"  (Matt.  16  :  18,  19).  [To  the  same 
He  says  after  His  resurrection:  '^Feed  my  sheep"  (John 
21  :  15).  Upon  him  He  builds  His  Church,  and  to  him  He 
commits  His  sheep  to  be  fed,  and  although.  Interpolation^ 
Upon  one  he  builds  the  Church,  although  also  to  all  the 
Apostles  after  His  resurrection  He  gives  an  equal  power  and 
says,  ''As  the  Father  has  sent  me,  I  also  send  you:  receive 
ye  the  Holy  Ghost:  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  shall 
be  retained"  (John  20  :  21);  yet,  that  He  might  show  the 
unity,  [He  founded  one  see.  Interpolation]  He  arranged  by 
His  authority  the  origin  of  that  unity  as  beginning  from  one. 
Assuredly  the  rest  of  the  Apostles  were  also  what  Peter  was, 
with  a  like  partnership  both  of  honor  and  power;  but  the 
beginning  proceeds  from  unity  [and  the  primacy  is  given  to 
Peter.  Interpolation],  that  there  might  be  shown  to  be  one 
Church  of  Christ  [and  one  see.  And  they  are  all  shepherds, 
but  the  flock  is  shown  to  be  one  which  is  fed  by  the  Apostles 
with  unanimous  consent.  Interpolation].  Which  one  Church 
the  Holy  Spirit  also  in  the  Song  of  Songs  designates  in  the 
person  of  the  Lord  and  says:  "My  dove,  my  spotless  one,  is 
but  one.  She  is  the  only  one  of  her  mother,  chosen  of  her 
that  bare  her"  (Cant.  6:9).  Does  he  who  does  not  hold 
this  unity  of  the  Church  [unity  of  Peter.  Corrupt  reading] 
think  that  he  holds  the  faith?  Does  he  who  strives  against 
and  resists  the  Church  [who  deserts  the  chair  of  Peter.  Inter- 
polation] trust  that  he  is  in  the  Church,  when,  moreover,  the 
blessed  Apostle  Paul  teaches  the  same  things  and  sets  forth 
the  sacrament  of  unity,  saying,  ''There  is  one  body  and  one 
spirit,  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one 
baptism,  one  God"?    (Eph.  4:4.) 


242      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

Ch.  5.  And  this  unity  we  ought  to  hold  firmly  and  assert, 
especially  we  bishops  who  preside  in  the  Church,  that  we  may 
prove  the  episcopate  itself  to  be  one  and  undivided.  Let 
no  one  deceive  the  brotherhood  by  a  falsehood;  let  no  one 
corrupt  the  truth  by  a  perfidious  prevarication.  The  episco- 
pate is  one,  each  part  of  which  is  held  by  each  one  in  its 
entirety.  The  Church,  also,  is  one  which  is  spread  abroad 
far  and  wide  into  a  multitude  by  an  increase  of  fruitfulness. 
As  there  are  many  rays  of  the  sun,  but  one  light,  and  many 
branches  of  a  tree,  but  one  strength  based  upon  its  tenacious 
root,  and  since  from  one  spring  flow  many  streams,  although 
the  multiplicity  seems  diffused  in  the  liberality  of  an  overflow- 
ing abundance,  yet  the  unity  is  still  preserved  in  its  source. 

(b)  Firmilian  of  Caesarea,  Ep.  ad  Cyprianum,  in  Cyprian, 
Ep.  74  [  =  75]-     (MSL,  3  :  1024.) 

The  matter  in  dispute  was  the  rebaptism  of  those  heretics  who 
had  received  baptism  before  they  conformed  to  the  Church.  See  §  52. 
It  was  the  burning  question  after  the  rise  of  the  Novatian  sect.  Ste- 
phen, bishop  of  Rome  (254-257),  had  excommunicated  a  number  of 
churches  and  bishops,  among  them  probably  Cyprian  himself.  See 
the  epistle  of  Dionysius  to  Sixtus  of  Rome,  the  successor  of  Stephen, 
in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  5.  "He"  (Stephen)  therefore  had 
written  previously  concerning  Helenus  and  FirmiHanus  and  all  those 
in  Cilicia,  Cappadocia,  Galatia,  and  the  neighboring  countries,  say- 
ing that  he  would  not  communicate  with  them  for  this  same  cause: 
namely,  that  they  rebaptized  heretics.  This  attitude  of  Stephen 
roused  no  little  resentment  in  the  East,  as  is  shown  by  the  indignant 
tone  of  FirmiHan,  who  recognizes  no  authority  in  Rome.  The  text 
may  be  found  in  Mirbt,  n.  74,  and  in  part  in  Kirch,  n.  274.  The 
epistle  of  Firmilian  is  to  be  found  among  the  epistles  of  Cyprian,  to 
whom  it  was  written. 

Ch.  2.  We  may  in  this  matter  give  thanks  to  Stephen  that 
it  has  now  happened  through  his  unkindness  [inhumanity] 
that  we  receive  proof  of  your  faith  and  wisdom. 

Ch.  3.  But  let  these  things  which  were  done  by  Stephen  be 
passed  by  for  the  present,  lest,  while  we  remember  his  audac- 
ity and  pride,  we  bring  a  more  lasting  sadness  on  ourselves 
from  the  things  he  has  wickedly  done. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  243 

Ch.  6.  That  they  who  are  at  Rome  do  not  observe  those 
things  in  all  cases  which  have  been  handed  down  from  the 
beginning,  and  vainly  pretend  the  authority  of  the  Apostles, 
any  one  may  know;  also,  from  the  fact  that  concerning  the 
celebration  of  the  day  of  Easter,  and  concerning  many  other 
sacraments  of  divine  matters,  one  may  see  that  there  are  some 
diversities  among  them,  and  that  all  things  are  not  observed 
there  aKke  which  are  observed  at  Jerusalem;  just  as  in  very 
many  other  provinces  also  many  things  are  varied  because 
of  the  difference  of  places  and  names,  yet  on  this  account 
there  is  no  departure  at  all  from  the  peace  and  unity  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  And  this  departure  Stephen  has  now 
dared  to  make;  breaking  the  peace  against  you,  which  his 
predecessors  have  always  kept  with  you  in  mutual  love  and 
honor,  even  herein  defaming  Peter  and  Paul,  the  blessed 
Apostles,  as  if  the  very  men  dehvered  this  who  in  their  epis- 
tles execrated  heretics  and  warned  us  to  avoid  them.  Whence 
it  appears  that  this  tradition  is  human  which  maintains  her- 
etics, and  asserts  that  they  have  baptism,  which  belongs  to 
the  Church  alone. 

Ch.  17.  And  in  this  respect  I  am  justly  indignant  at  this  so 
open  and  manifest  folly  of  Stephen,  that  he  who  so  boasts  of 
the  place  of  his  episcopate  and  contends  that  he  holds  the 
succession  of  Peter,  on  whom  the  foundation  of  the  Church 
was  laid,  should  introduce  many  other  rocks  and  establish 
new  buildings  of  many  churches,  maintaining  that  there  is  a 
baptism  in  them  by  his  authority;  for  those  who  are  baptized, 
without  doubt,  make  up  the  number  of  the  Church.  .  .  . 
Stephen,  who  announces  that  he  holds  by  succession  the 
throne  of  Peter,  is  stirred  with  no  zeal  against  heretics,  when 
he  concedes  to  them,  not  a  moderate,  but  the  very  greatest 
power  of  grace. 

Ch.  19.  This,  indeed,  you  Africans  are  able  to  say  against 
Stephen,  that  when  you  knew  the  truth  you  forsook  the 
error  of  custom.  But  we  join  custom  to  truth,  and  to  the 
Romans'   custom   we   oppose   custom,   but   the   custom   of 


244      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

truth,  holding  from  the  beginning  that  which  was  delivered 
by  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  Nor  do  we  remember  that  this 
at  any  time  began  among  us,  since  it  has  always  been  observed 
here,  that  we  have  known  none  but  one  Church  of  God,  and 
have  accounted  no  baptism  holy  except  that  of  the  holy 
Church. 

Ch.  24.  Consider  with  what  want  of  judgment  you  dare  to 
blame  those  who  strive  for  the  truth  against  falsehood.^.  .  . 
For  how  many  strifes  and  dissensions  have  you  stirred  up 
throughout  the  churches  of  the  whole  world !  Moreover,  how 
great  sin  have  you  heaped  up  for  yourself,  when  you  cut  your- 
self off  from  so  many  flocks !  For  it  is  yourself  that  you  have 
cut  off.  Do  not  deceive  yourself,  since  he  is  really  the  schis- 
matic who  has  made  himself  an  apostate  from  the  commu- 
nion of  ecclesiastical  unity.  For  while  you  think  that  all  may 
be  excommunicated  by  you,  you  have  alone  excommunicated 
yourself  from  all;  and  not  even  the  precepts  of  an  Apostle 
have  been  able  to  mould  you  to  the  rule  of  truth  and  peace.^ 

Ch.  25.  How  carefully  has  Stephen  fulfilled  these  salutary 
commands  and  warnings  of  the  Apostle,  keeping  in  the  first 
place  lowKness  of  mind  and  meekness!  For  what  is  more 
lowly  or  meek  than  to  have  disagreed  with  so  many  bishops 
throughout  the  whole  world,  breaking  peace  with  each  one 
of  them  in  various  kinds  of  discord:  at  one  time  with  the 
Easterns,  as  we  are  sure  is  not  unknown  to  you;  at  another 
time  with  you  who  are  in  the  south,  from  whom  he  received 
bishops  as  messengers  sufficiently  patiently  and  meekly  as 
not  to  receive  them  even  to  the  speech  of  common  conference; 
and,  even  more,  so  unmindful  of  love  and  charity  as  to  com- 
mand the  whole  brotherhood  that  no  one  should  receive 
them  into  his  house,  so  that  not  only  peace  and  communion, 
but  also  a  shelter  and  entertainment  were  denied  to  them 
when  they  came.    This  is  to  have  kept  the  unity  of  the  Spirit 

1  This  whole  passage  is  supposed  to  be  addressed  to  Stephen.    Cf.  the  open- 
ing words  of  §  25. 
2Eph.  4:  1-6  follows. 


CONTROVERSY  OVER  BAPTISM  245 

in  the  bond  of  peace,  to  cut  himself  off  from  the  unity  of  love, 
and  to  make  himself  a  stranger  in  all  things  to  his  brethren, 
and  to  rebel  against  the  sacrament  and  the  faith  with  the  mad- 
ness of  contumacious  discord.  .  .  .  Stephen  is  not  ashamed 
to  afford  patronage  to  such  a  position  in  the  Church,  and  for 
the  sake  of  maintaining  heretics  to  divide  the  brotherhood; 
and,  in  addition,  to  call  Cyprian  a  false  Christ,  and  a  false 
Apostle,  and  a  deceitful  worker,  and  he,  conscious  that  all 
these  characters  are  for  himself,  has  been  in  advance  of  you 
by  falsely  objecting  to  another  those  things  which  he  him- 
self ought  to  bear. 

§  52.    Controversy  over  Baptism  by  Heretics 

In  the  great  persecutions  schisms  arose  in  connection  with 
the  administration  of  discipline  {cf.  §  46).  The  schismatics 
held  in  general  the  same  faith  as  the  main  body  of  Christians. 
Were  the  sacraments,  then,  they  administered  to  be  regarded 
as  valid  in  such  a  sense  that  when  they  conformed  to  the 
CathoHc  Church,  which  they  frequently  did,  they  need  not 
be  baptized,  having  once  been  vahdly  baptized;  or  should 
their  schismatic  baptism  be  regarded  as  invalid  and  they  be 
required  to  receive  baptism  on  conforming  if  they  had  not 
previously  been  baptized  within  the  Church?  Was  baptism 
outside  the  unity  of  the  Church  valid?  Rome  answered  in 
the  affirmative,  admitting  conforming  schismatics  without 
distinguishing  as  to  where  they  had  been  baptized;  North 
Africa  answered  in  the  negative  and  required  not,  indeed,  a 
second  baptism,  but  claimed  that  the  Church's  baptism  was 
alone  valid,  and  that  if  the  person  conforming  had  been  bap- 
tized in  schism  he  had  not  been  baptized  at  all.  This  view 
was  shared  by  at  least  some  churches  in  Asia  Minor  {cf. 
§  51,  h),  and  possibly  elsewhere.  It  became  the  basis  of  the 
Donatist  position  {cj.  §  62),  which  schism  shared  with  the 
Novatian  schism  the  opinion,  generally  rejected  by  the 
Church,  that  the  validity  of  a  sacrament  depended  upon  the 


246      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

spiritual  condition  of  the  minister  of  the  sacrament,  e.  g., 
whether  he  was  in  schism  or  no. 

Additional  source  material:  Seventh  Council  of  Carthage  (ANF, 
vol.  V);  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  7  :  4-6;  Augustine,  De  Baptismo 
contra  Donatistas,  Bk.  Ill  (PNF,  ser.  I,  vol.  IV). 

(a)  Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  Juhianum,  Ep.  73,  7  [  =  72].  (MSL, 
3  :  1159,  168.) 

A  portion  of  this  epistle  may  be  found  in  Mirbt,  n.  70. 

Ch.  7.  It  is  manifest  where  and  by  whom  the  remission  of 
sins  can  be  given,  i.  e.,  that  remission  which  is  given  by 
baptism.  For  first  of  all  the  Lord  gave  the  power  to  Peter, 
upon  whom  He  built  the  Church,  and  whence  he  appointed 
and  showed  the  source  of  unity,  the  power,  namely,  that 
that  should  be  loosed  in  heaven  which  he  loosed  on  earth 
[John  20  :  21  quoted].  When  we  perceive  that  only  they  who 
are  set  over  the  Church  and  established  in  the  Gospel  law  and 
in  the  ordinance  of  the  Lord  are  allowed  to  baptize  and  to 
give  remission  of  sins,  we  see  that  outside  of  the  Church 
nothing  can  be  bound  or  loosed,  for  there  there  is  no  one 
who  can  either  bind  or  loose  anything. 

Ch.  21.  Can  the  power  of  baptism  be  greater  or  of  more 
avail  than  confession,  than  suffering  when  one  confesses  Christ 
before  men,  and  is  baptized  in  his  own  blood?  And  yet,  even 
this  baptism  does  not  benefit  a  heretic,  although  he  has  con- 
fessed Christ  and  been  put  to  death  outside  the  Church, 
unless  the  patrons  and  advocates  of  heretics  [i.  e.,  those  whom 
Cyprian  is  opposing]  declare  that  the  heretics  who  are  slain 
in  a  false  confession  of  Christ  are  martyrs,  and  assign  to  them 
the  glory  and  the  crown  of  martyrdom  contrary  to  the  tes- 
timony of  the  Apostle,  who  says  that  it  will  profit  them 
nothing  although  they  are  burned  and  slain.  But  if  not  even 
the  baptism  of  a  pubHc  confession  and  blood  can  profit  a 
heretic  to  salvation,  because  there  is  no  salvation  outside  of 
the  Church,  how  much  less  shall  it  benefit  him  if,  in  a  hiding- 
place  and  a  cave  of  robbers  stained  with  the  contagion  of 


CONTROVERSY  OVER  BAPTISM  247 

adulterous  waters,  he  has  not  only  not  put  oflf  his  old  sins, 
but  rather  heaped  up  still  newer  and  greater  ones !  Wherefore 
baptism  cannot  be  common  to  us  and  to  heretics,  to  whom 
neither  God  the  Father  nor  Christ  the  Son,  nor  the  Holy 
Ghost,  nor  the  faith,  nor  the  Church  itself  is  common.  And 
wherefore  they  ought  to  be  baptized  who  come  from  heresy 
to  the  Church,  so  that  they  who  are  prepared  and  receive  the 
lawful  and  true  and  only  baptism  of  the  holy  Church,  by 
divine  regeneration  for  the  kingdom  of  God  may  be  born  of 
both  sacraments,  because  it  is  written:  ''Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  the  kingdom 
of  God"  [John  3  :  5]. 

Ch.  26.  These  things,  dearest  brother,  we  have  briefly 
written  to  you  according  to  our  modest  abilities,  prescribing 
to  none  and  prejudging  none,  so  as  to  prevent  any  one  of  the 
bishops  doing  what  he  thinks  well,  and  having  the  free  exer- 
cise of  his  judgment. 

(b)  Cyprian,  Ep.  ad  Magnum,  Ep.  75  [  =  69].  (MSL, 
3  :  1183.)     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  67. 

With  your  usual  diHgence  you  have  consulted  my  poor 
intelligence,  dearest  son,  as  to  whether,  among  other  heretics, 
they  also  who  come  from  Novatian  ought,  after  his  profane 
washing,  to  be  baptized  and  sanctified  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
with  the  lawful,  true,  and  only  baptism  of  the  Church.  In 
answer  to  this  question,  as  much  as  the  capacity  of  my  faith 
and  the  sanctity  and  truth  of  the  divine  Scriptures  suggest, 
I  say  that  no  heretics  and  schismatics  at  all  have  any  right 
to  power.  For  which  reason  Novatian,  since  he  is  without 
the  Church  and  is  acting  in  opposition  to  the  peace  and  love 
of  Christ,  neither  ought  to  be,  nor  can  be,  omitted  from  being 
counted  among  the  adversaries  and  antichrists.  For  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  when  He  declared  in  His  Gospel  that  those 
who  were  not  with  Him  were  His  adversaries,  did  not  point 
out  any  species  of  heresy,  but  showed  that  all  who  were  not 
with  Him,   and   who   were   not  gathering  with   Him,   were 


248      CHURCH  CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

scattering  His  flock,  and  were  His  adversaries,  saying:  "He 
that  is  not  with  me  is  against  me,  and  he  that  gathereth  not 
with  me  scattereth"  [Luke  ii  :  23].  Moreover,  the  blessed 
Apostle  John  distinguished  no  heresy  or  schism,  neither  did 
he  set  down  any  specially  separated,  but  he  called  all  who 
had  gone  out  from  the  Church,  and  who  acted  in  opposition 
to  the  Church,  antichrists,  saying,  ''Ye  have  heard  that  Anti- 
christ Cometh,  and  even  now  are  come  many  antichrists; 
wherefore  we  know  that  this  is  the  last  time.  They  went 
out  from  us,  but  they  were  not  of  us,  for  if  they  had  been  of 
us,  they  would  have  continued  with  us"  [I  John  2  :  18  /.]. 
Whence  it  appears  that  all  are  adversaries  of  the  Lord  and  are 
antichrists  who  are  known  to  have  departed  from  the  charity 
and  from  the  unity  of  the  CathoHc  Church. 

§  53.  The  Beginnings  of  Monasticism 

Asceticism  in  some  form  is  common  to  almost  all  religions. 
It  was  practised  extensively  in  early  Christianity  and  ascetics 
of  both  sexes  were  numerous.  This  asceticism,  in  addition  to 
a  life  largely  devoted  to  prayer  and  fasting,  was  marked  by 
refraining  from  marriage.  But  these  ascetics  lived  in  close 
relations  with  those  who  were  non-ascetics.  Monasticism  is 
an  advance  upon  this  earlier  asceticism  in  that  it  attempts  to 
create,  apart  from  non-ascetics,  a  social  order  composed  only 
of  ascetics  in  which  the  ascetic  ideals  may  be  more  success- 
fully reahzed.  The  transition  was  made  by  the  hermit  Kfe 
in  which  the  ascetic  Hved  alone  in  deserts  and  other  solitudes. 
This  became  monasticism  by  the  union  of  ascetics  for  mutual 
spiritual  aid.  This  advance  is  associated  with  St.  Anthony. 
See  also  Pachomius,  in  §  77. 

Additional  source  material:  Pseudo- Clement,  De  Virginitate  (ANF, 
VIII,  53);  Methodius,  Symposium  (ANF,  VI,  309);  the  Lausiac  His- 
tory of  Palladius,  E.  C.  Butler,  Texts  and  Studies,  Cambridge,  1898; 
Paradise,  or  Garden  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  trans,  by  E.  A.  W.  Budge, 
London,  1907. 

Athanasius,  VitaS.  Antonii,  2-4,  44.    (MSG,  26  :  844,  908.) 


THE  BEGINNINGS   OF  MONASTICISM        249 

Anthony,  although  not  the  first  hermit,  gave  such  an  impetus  to 
the  ascetic  life  and  did  so  much  to  bring  about  some  union  of  ascetics 
that  he  has  been  popularly  regarded  as  the  founder  of  monasticism. 
He  died  356,  at  the  age  of  one  hundred  and  five.  His  Life,  by  St. 
Athanasius,  although  formerly  attacked,  is  a  genuine,  and,  on  the 
whole,  trustworthy  account  of  this  remarkable  man.  It  was  written 
either  357  or  365,  and  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Evagrius  of 
Antioch  (died  393).  Everywhere  it  roused  the  greatest  enthusiasm  for 
monasticism.  The  Life  of  St.  Paul  of  Thebes,  by  St.  Jerome,  is  of 
very  different  character,  and  of  no  historical  value. 


Ch.  2.  After  the  death  of  his  parents,  Anthony  was  left 
alone  with  one  little  sister.  He  was  about  eighteen  or  twenty 
years  old,  and  on  him  rested  the  care  of  both  the  home  and 
his  sister.  Now  it  happened  not  six  months  after  the  death  of 
his  parents,  and  when  he  was  going,  according  to  custom, 
into  the  Lord's  house,  and  was  communing  with  himself,  that 
he  reflected  as  he  walked  how  the  Apostles  left  all  and  fol- 
lowed the  Saviour,  and  how,  in  the  Acts,  men  sold  their  pos- 
sessions and  brought  and  laid  them  at  the  Apostles'  feet  for 
distribution  to  the  needy,  and  what  and  how  great  a  hope 
was  laid  up  for  them  in  heaven.  While  he  was  reflecting  on 
these  things  he  entered  the  church,  and  it  happened  that  at 
that  time  the  Gospel  was  being  read,  and  he  heard  the  Lord 
say  to  the  rich  man:  ''If  thou  wouldest  be  perfect,  go  and  sell 
that  thou  hast  and  give  to  the  poor;  and  come  and  follow 
me  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven."  Anthony,  as 
though  God  had  put  him  in  mind  of  the  saints  and  the  pas- 
sage had  been  read  on  his  account,  went  out  straightway  from 
the  Lord's  house,  and  gave  the  possessions  which  he  had 
from  his  forefathers  to  the  villagers — they  were  three  hundred 
acres,  productive  and  very  fair — that  they  should  be  no  more 
a  clog  upon  himself  and  his  sister.  And  all  the  rest  that 
was  movable  he  sold,  and,  having  got  together  much  money, 
he  gave  it  to  the  poor,  reserving  a  little,  however,  for  his  sis- 
ter's sake. 

Ch.  3.  And  again  as  he  went  into  the  Lord's  house,  and 
hearing  the  Lord  say  in  the  Gospel,  ''Be  not  anxious  for  the 


250     CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

morrow,"  he  could  stay  no  longer,  but  went  and  gave  also 
those  things  to  the  poor.  He  then  committed  his  sister  to 
known  and  faithful  virgins,  putting  her  in  a  convent  [parthe- 
non],  to  be  brought  up,  and  henceforth  he  devoted  himself 
outside  his  house  to  ascetic  discipline,  taking  heed  to  himself 
and  training  himself  patiently.  For  there  were  not  yet  many 
monasteries  in  Egypt,  and  no  monk  at  all  knew  of  the  distant 
desert;  but  every  one  of  those  who  wished  to  give  heed  to 
themselves  practised  the  ascetic  discipline  in  solitude  near 
his  own  village.  Now  there  was  in  the  next  village  an  old 
man  who  had  lived  from  his  youth  the  life  of  a  hermit. 
Anthony,  after  he  had  seen  this  man,  imitated  him  in  piety. 
And  at  first  he  began  to  abide  in  places  outside  the  village. 
Then,  if  he  heard  of  any  good  man  anywhere,  like  the  prudent 
bee,  he  went  forth  and  sought  him,  nor  did  he  turn  back  to 
his  own  place  until  he  had  seen  him ;  and  he  returned,  having 
got  from  the  good  man  supplies,  as  it  were,  for  his  journey 
in  the  way  of  virtue.  So  dwelling  there  at  first,  he  steadfastly 
held  to  his  purpose  not  to  return  to  the  abode  of  his  parents  or 
to  the  remembrance  of  his  kinsfolk ;  but  to  keep  all  his  desire 
and  energy  for  the  perfecting  of  his  discipline.  He  worked, 
however,  with  his  hands,  having  heard  that  ^'he  who  is  idle, 
let  him  not  eat,"  and  part  he  spent  on  bread  and  part  he  gave 
to  the  needy.  And  he  prayed  constantly,  because  he  had 
learned  that  a  man  ought  to  pray  in  secret  unceasingly. 
For  he  had  given  such  heed  to  what  was  read  that  none  of 
those  things  that  were  written  fell  from  him  to  the  ground; 
for  he  remembered  all,  and  afterward  his  memory  served  him 
for  books. 

Ch.  4.  Thus  conducting  himself,  Anthony  was  beloved  by 
all.  He  subjected  himself  in  sincerity  to  the  good  men  he 
visited,  and  learned  thoroughly  wherein  each  surpassed  him 
in  zeal  and  disciphne.  He  observed  the  graciousness  of  one, 
the  unceasing  prayer  of  another;  he  took  knowledge  of  one's 
freedom  from  anger,  and  another's  kindliness;  he  gave  heed 
to  one  as  he  watched,  to  another  as  he  studied;  one  he  ad- 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  MONASTICISM        251 

mired  for  his  endurance,  another  for  his  fasting  and  sleeping 
on  the  ground ;  he  watched  the  meekness  of  one,  and  the  long- 
suffering  of  another;  and  at  the  same  time  he  noted  the  piety 
toward  Christ  and  the  mutual  love  which  animated  all. 

Athanasius  describes  Anthony's  removal  to  the  desert  and  the 
coming  of  disciples  to  him,  and  weaves  into  his  narrative,  in  the  form 
of  a  speech,  a  long  account  of  the  discipline  laid  down,  probably  by- 
Anthony  himself,  chs.  16-43.  It  is  to  this  long  speech  that  the  opening 
words  of  the  following  section  refers. 

Ch.  44.  While  Anthony  was  thus  speaking  all  rejoiced; 
in  some  the  love  of  virtue  increased,  in  others  carelessness  was 
thrown  aside,  the  self-conceit  of  others  was  stopped;  and 
all  were  persuaded  to  despise  the  assaults  of  the  Evil  One, 
and  marvelled  at  the  grace  given  Anthony  from  the  Lord  for 
the  discerning  of  spirits.  So  their  cells  were  in  the  mountains, 
like  tabernacles  filled  with  holy  bands  of  men  who  sang  psalms, 
loved  reading,  fasted,  prayed,  rejoiced  in  the  hope  of  things 
to  come,  labored  in  almsgiving,  and  maintained  love  and 
harmony  with  one  another.  And  truly  it  was  possible  to 
behold  a  land,  as  it  were,  set  by  itself,  filled  with  piety  and 
justice.  For  then  there  was  neither  the  evil-doer  nor  the 
injured,  nor  the  reproaches  of  the  tax-gatherer;  but  instead 
a  multitude  of  ascetics,  and  the  one  purpose  of  all  was  to 
aim  at  virtue.  So  that  one  beholding  the  cells  again  and 
seeing  such  good  order  among  the  monks  would  lift  up  his 
voice  and  say:  '^How  goodly  are  thy  dwellings,  0  Jacob, 
and  thy  tents,  0  Israel;  as  shady  glens  and  as  a  garden  by  a 
river;  as  tents  which  the  Lord  has  pitched,  and  like  cedars 
near  the  waters"  [Num.  24  :  5,  6]. 

Ch.  45.  Anthony,  however,  returned,  according  to  his  cus- 
tom, alone  to  his  cell,  increased  his  discipline,  and  sighed 
daily  as  he  thought  of  the  mansions  of  heaven,  having  his 
desire  fixed  on  them  and  pondering  over  the  shortness  of 
man's  life. 


252      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 


§  54.      MANICHiEANISM 

The  last  great  rival  religion  to  Christianity  was  Manichaean- 
ism,  the  last  of  the  important  syncretistic  religions  which 
drew  from  Persian  and  allied  sources.  Its  connection  with 
Christianity  was  at  first  sHght  and  its  affinities  were  with 
Eastern  Gnosticism.  After  280  it  began  to  spread  within 
the  Empire,  and  was  soon  opposed  by  the  Roman  authorities. 
Yet  it  flourished,  and,  like  other  Gnostic  religions,  with  which 
it  is  to  be  classed,  it  assimilated  more  and  more  of  Christianity, 
until  in  the  time  of  Augustine  it  seemed  to  many  as  merely  a 
form  of  Christianity.  On  account  of  its  general  character,  it 
absorbed  for  the  most  part  what  remained  of  the  earlier 
Gnostic  systems  and  schools. 

Additional  source  material:  The  most  important  accessible  works 
are  the  so-called  Acta  Archelai  (ANF,  V,  175-235),  the  anti-Mani- 
chaean  writings  of  Augustine  (PNF,  ser.  I,  vol.  IV),  and  Alexander  of 
Lycopolis,  On  the  Manichceans  (ANF,  VI,  239).  On  Alexander  of 
Lycopolis,  see  DCB.  In  the  opinion  of  Bardenhewer,  Alexander  was 
probably  neither  a  bishop  nor  a  Christian  at  all,  but  a  heathen  and  a 
Platonist.     Roman  edict  against  Manichaeanism  in  Kirch,  n.  294. 

An  Nadim,  Fihrist.  (Translation  after  Kessler,  Mani^  1889.) 

The  Fihrist,  i.  e.,  Catalogue,  is  a  sort  of  history  of  literature  made 
in  the  eleventh  century  by  the  Moslem  historian  An  Nadim.  In  spite 
of  its  late  date,  it  is  the  most  important  authority  for  the  original 
doctrines  of  Mani  and  the  facts  of  his  life,  as  it  is  largely  made  up 
from  citations  from  ancient  authors  and  writings  of  Mani  and  his 
original  disciples. 

(a)  The  Life  of  Mani. 

Mohammed  ibn  Isak  says:  Mani  was  the  son  of  Fatak,^  of 
the  family  of  the  Chaskanier.  Ecbatana  is  said  to  have  been 
the  original  home  of  his  father,  from  which  he  emigrated  to  the 
province  of  Babylon.  He  took  up  his  residence  in  Al  Madain, 
in  a  portion  of  the  city  known  as  Ctesiphon.  In  that  place 
was  an  idol's  temple,  and  Fatak  was  accustomed  to  go  into 
it,  as  did  also  the  other  people  of  the  place.    It  happened  one 

^  Or,  Fonnak. 


MANICH^ANISM  253 

day  that  a  voice  sounded  forth  from  the  sacred  interior  of 
the  temple,  saying  to  him:  ^'Fatak,  eat  no  jQesh,  drink  no 
wine  and  refrain  from  carnal  intercourse."  This  was  repeated 
to  him  several  times  on  three  days.  When  Fatak  perceived 
this,  he  joined  a  society  of  people  in  the  neighborhood  of 
Dastumaisan  which  were  known  under  the  name  of  Al- 
Mogtasilah,  i.  e.,  those  who  wash  themselves,  baptists,  and 
of  whom  remnants  are  to  be  found  in  these  parts  and  in  the 
marshy  districts  at  the  present  time.  These  belonged  to  that 
mode  of  life  which  Fatak  had  been  commanded  to  follow. 
His  wife  was  at  that  time  pregnant  with  Mani,  and  when  she 
had  given  him  birth  she  had,  as  they  say,  glorious  visions 
regarding  him,  and  even  when  she  was  awake  she  saw  him 
taken  by  some  one  unseen,  who  bore  him  aloft  into  the  air, 
and  then  brought  him  down  again;  sometimes  he  remained 
even  a  day  or  two  before  he  came  down  again.  Thereupon  his 
father  sent  for  him  and  had  him  brought  to  the  place  where 
he  was,  and  so  he  was  brought  up  with  him  in  his  religion. 
Mani,  in  spite  of  his  youthful  age,  spake  words  of  wisdom. 
After  he  had  completed  his  twelfth  year  there  came  to  him, 
according  to  his  statement,  a  revelation  from  the  King  of  the 
Paradise  of  Light,  who  is  God  the  Exalted,  as  he  said.  The 
angel  which  brought  him  the  revelation  was  called  Eltawan; 
this  name  means  ''the  Companion."  He  spoke  to  Mani,  and 
said:  "Separate  thyself  from  this  sort  of  faith,  for  thou  belong- 
est  not  among  its  adherents,  and  it  is  obligatory  upon  you  to 
practise  continence  and  to  forsake  the  fleshly  desires,  yet  on 
account  of  thy  youth  the  time  has  not  come  for  thee  to  take 
up  thy  public  work."  But  when  he  was  twenty-four  years 
old,  Eltawan  appeared  to  him  and  said:  ''Hail,  Mani,  from 
me  and  from  the  Lord  who  has  sent  me  to  thee  and  has 
chosen  thee  to  be  his  prophet.  He  commands  thee  now  to 
proclaim  thy  truth  and  on  my  announcement  to  proclaim  the 
truth  which  is  from  him  and  to  throw  thyself  into  this  calling 
with  all  thy  zeal." 

The  Manichaeans  say:    He  first  openly  entered  upon  his 


254      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

work  on  the  day  when  Sapor,  the  son  of  Ardaschir,  entered 
upon  his  reign,  and  placed  the  crown  upon  his  head;  and  this 
was  Sunday,  the  first  day  of  Nisan  (March  20,  241),  when 
the  sun  stood  in  the  sign  Aries.  He  was  accompanied  by  two 
men,  who  had  already  attached  themselves  to  his  religion; 
one  was  called  Simeon,  the  other  Zakwa;  besides  these,  his 
father  accompanied  him,  to  see  how  his  affairs  would  turn 
out. 

Mani  said  he  was  the  Paraclete,  whom  Jesus,  of  blessed 
memory,^  had  previously  announced.  Mani  took  the  elements 
of  his  doctrine  from  the  religion  of  the  Magi  and  Chris- 
tianity. .  .  .  Before  he  met  Sapor  Mani  had  spent  about 
forty  years  in  foreign  lands.^  Afterward  he  converted  Peroz, 
the  brother  of  Sapor,  and  Peroz  procured  him  an  audience 
with  his  brother  Sapor.  The  Manichaeans  relate:  He  there- 
upon entered  where  he  was  and  on  his  shoulders  were  shining, 
as  it  were,  two  candles.  When  Sapor  perceived  him,  he  was 
filled  with  reverence  for  him,  and  he  appeared  great  in  his 
eyes;  although  he  previously  had  determined  to  seize  him 
and  put  him  to  death.  After  he  had  met  him,  therefore,  the 
fear  of  him  filled  him,  he  rejoiced  over  him  and  asked  him  why 
he  had  come  and  promised  to  become  his  disciple.  Mani  re- 
quested of  him  a  number  of  things,  among  them  that  his 
followers  might  be  unmolested  in  the  capital  and  in  the  other 
territories  of  the  Persian  Empire,  and  that  they  might  extend 
themselves  whither  they  wished  in  the  provinces.  Sapor 
granted  him  all  he  asked. 

Mani  had  already  preached  in  India,  China,  and  among  the 
inhabitants  of  Turkestan,  and  in  every  land  he  left  behind 
him  disciples.^ 


^The  author  is  a  Moslem,  and  therefore  speaks  of  Jesus  with  great  respect; 
Mani  regarded  Jesus  as  evil. 

2  This  is  undoubtedly  a  mistake. 

3  Important  material  has  been  recently  recovered  from  Turfan  in  Chinese 
Turkestan,  reported  by  Messrs.  Stein,  Le  Coq,  and  F.  K.  W.  Muller,  in  Sit- 
zungsherichte  der  Berliner  Academie,  for  1904,  p.  348;  for  1905,  p.  1077;  for 
1908,  p.  398;  for  1909,  p.  1202;  for  1910,  pp.  293,  307. 


MANICH^ANISM  255 

(b)  The  Teaching  of  Mani. 

The  following  extract  from  the  same  work  gives  but  the  begin- 
ning of  an  extended  statement  of  Mani's  teaching.  But  it  is  hoped 
that  enough  is  given  to  show  the  mythological  character  of  his  specu- 
lation. The  bulk  of  his  doctrine  was  Persian  and  late  Babylonian, 
and  the  Christian  element  was  very  slight.  It  is  clear  from  the  writings 
of  St.  Augustine  that  the  doctrine  changed  much  in  later  years  in  the 
West. 

The  doctrine  of  Mani,  especially  his  dogmas  of  the  Eternal, 
to  whom  be  praise  and  glory,  of  the  creation  of  the  world  and 
the  contest  between  Light  and  Darkness:  Mani  put  at  the 
beginning  of  the  world  two  eternal  principles.  Of  these  one 
is  Light,  the  other  Darkness.  They  are  separated  from  each 
other.  As  to  the  Light,  this  is  the  First,  the  Mighty  One,  and 
the  Infinite.  He  is  the  Deity,  the  King  of  the  Paradise  of 
Light.  He  has  five  members  or  attributes,  namely,  gentle- 
ness, wisdom,  understanding,  discretion,  and  insight;  and 
further  five  members  or  attributes,  namely,  love,  faith,  truth, 
bravery,  and  wisdom.  He  asserts  that  God  was  from  all 
eternity  with  these  attributes.  Together  with  the  Light-God 
there  are  two  other  things  from  eternity,  the  air  and  the  earth. 

Mani  teaches  further :  The  members  of  the  air,  or  the  Light- 
Ether,  are  five:  gentleness,  wisdom,  understanding,  discre- 
tion, and  insight.  The  members  of  the  Light-Earth  are  the 
soft  gentle  breath,  the  wind,  the  Hght,  the  water,  and  the 
fire.  As  to  the  other  Original  Being,  the  Darkness,  its  mem- 
bers are  also  five:  the  vapor,  the  burning  heat,  the  fiery  wind, 
the  poison,  and  the  darkness. 

This  bright  shining  Primal  Being  was  in  immediate  proxi- 
mity with  the  dark  Primal  Being,  so  that  no  wall  of  partition 
was  between  them  and  the  Light  touched  the  Darkness  on  its 
broad  side.  The  Light  is  unlimited  in  its  height,  and  also  to 
the  right  hand  and  to  the  left;  the  Darkness,  however,  is  un- 
limited in  its  depth,  and  also  to  the  right  hand  and  to  the  left. 

From  this  Dark-Earth  rose  Satan,  not  so  that  he  himself 
was  without  beginning,  although  his  parts  were  in  their  ele- 


256      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

merits  without  beginning.  These  parts  joined  themselves 
together  from  the  elements  and  formed  themselves  into  Satan. 
His  head  was  like  that  of  a  lion,  his  trunk  like  that  of  a  dragon, 
his  wings  as  those  of  a  bird,  his  tail  like  that  of  a  great  fish, 
and  his  four  feet  like  the  feet  of  creeping  things.  When  this 
Satan  had  been  formed  from  the  Darkness — his  name  is  the 
First  Devil — then  he  began  to  devour  and  to  swallow  up  and 
to  ruin,  to  move  about  to  the  right  and  to  the  left,  and  to  get 
down  into  the  deep,  so  that  he  continually  brought  ruin  and 
destruction  to  every  one  who  attempted  to  overmaster  him. 
Next  he  hastened  up  on  high  and  perceived  the  rays  of  light, 
but  felt  an  aversion  to  them.  Then  when  he  saw  how  these 
rays  by  reciprocal  influence  and  contact  were  increased  in 
brilliancy,  he  became  afraid  and  crept  together  into  himself, 
member  by  member,  and  withdrew  for  union  and  strengthen- 
ing back  to  his  original  constituent  parts.  Now  once  more 
he  hastened  back  into  the  height,  and  the  Light-Earth  noticed 
the  action  of  Satan  and  his  purpose  to  seize  and  to  attack  and 
to  destroy.  But  when  she  perceived  this  thereupon  the  world 
aeon  of  Insight  perceived  it,  then  the  aeon  of  Wisdom,  the 
aeon  of  Discretion,  the  aeon  of  the  Understanding,  and  then 
the  aeon  of  Gentleness.  Thereupon  the  King  of  the  Paradise 
of  Light  perceived  it  and  reflected  on  means  to  gain  the  mas- 
tery over  him.  His  armies  were  indeed  mighty  enough  to 
overcome  him;  he  had  the  wish,  however,  to  accompHsh  this 
himself.  Therefore  he  begat  with  the  spirit  of  his  right  hand, 
with  the  five  aeons,  and  with  his  twelve  elements  a  creature, 
and  that  was  the  Primal  Man,  and  him  he  sent  to  the  con- 
quest of  Darkness.^ 

CHAPTER  V.  THE  LAST  GREAT  PERSECUTION 

The  last  of  the  persecutions  was  closely  connected  with  the 
increased  efficiency  of  the  imperial  administration  after  a 

1  By  primal  man  is  not  meant  the  first  of  mankind  on  earth,  but  a  super- 
natural being. 


REORGANIZATION  OF  THE   EMPIRE         257 

period  of  anarchy,  and  was  more  effective  because  of  the 
greater  centralization  of  the  government  which  Diocletian  had 
introduced  (§55).  It  was  preceded  by  a  number  of  minor 
persecuting  regulations,  but  broke  forth  in  its  full  fury  in  303, 
raging  for  nearly  ten  years  (§  56).  It  was  by  far  the  most 
severe  of  all  persecutions,  in  extent  and  duration  and  severity 
surpassing  that  of  Decius  and  Valerian.  As  in  that  persecu- 
tion, very  many  suffered  severely,  still  more  lapsed,  unpre- 
pared for  suffering,  as  many  were  in  the  previous  persecution, 
and  the  Church  was  again  rent  with  dissensions  and  schisms 
arising  over  the  question  of  the  administration  of  discipHne. 

§  55.  The  Reorganization  of  the  Empire  by  Diocletian. 
§  56.  The  Diocletian  Persecution. 

§  57.  The  Rise  of  Schisms  in  Consequence  of  the  Diocle- 
tian Persecution. 

§55.  The  Reorganization  of  the  Empire  by  Diocletian 

After  a  period  of  anarchy  Diocletian  (284-305)  undertook  a 
reorganization  of  the  Empire  for  the  sake  of  greater  efficiency. 
Following  a  precedent  of  earlier  successful  emperors,  he 
shared  (285)  the  imperial  authority  with  a  colleague,  Maxi- 
mianus,  who  in  286  became  Augustus  of  the  West.  As  the 
greatest  danger  seemed  to  lie  in  the  East,  Diocletian  retained 
the  Eastern  part  of  the  Empire,  and  having  already  abandoned 
Rome  as  the  imperial  residence  (284),  he  settled  in  Nicomedia 
in  Bithynia.  To  provide  for  a  succession  to  the  throne  more 
efficient  than  the  chance  succession  of  natural  heirs,  two 
Caesars  were  appointed  in  293,  Constantius  Chlorus  for  the 
West,  and  Galerius,  the  son-in-law  of  Diocletian,  for  the  East. 
Constantius  at  once  became  the  son-in-law  of  Maximianus. 
These  Caesars  were  to  ascend  the  throne  when  the  Augusti 
resigned  after  twenty  years'  reign.  The  scheme  worked  tem- 
porarily for  greater  efficiency,  but  ended  in  civil  war  as  the 
claims  of  natural  heirs  were  set  aside  in  favor  of  an  arti- 
ficial dynasty.     At  the  same  time  the  system  bore  heavily 


258      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

upon  the  people  and  the  prosperity  of  the  Empire  rapidly  de- 
clined. 

Bibliography  in  Cambridge  Medieval  History,  London  and  New 
York,  191 1,  vol.  I. 

Lactantius,  De  Mortihus  Persecutorum,  7.     (MSL,  7  :  204.) 

When  Diocletian,  the  author  of  crimes  and  deviser  of  evils, 
was  ruining  all  things,  not  even  from  against  God  could  he 
withhold  his  hand.  This  man,  partly  by  avarice  and  partly 
by  timidity,  overturned  the  world.  For  he  made  three  per- 
sons sharers  with  him  in  the  government.  The  Empire  was 
divided  into  four  parts,  and  armies  were  multiplied,  since  each 
of  the  four  princes  strove  to  have  a  much  larger  military  force 
than  any  emperor  had  had  when  one  emperor  alone  carried 
on  the  government.  There  began  to  be  a  greater  number  of 
those  who  received  taxes  than  of  those  who  paid  them;  so 
that  the  means  of  the  husbandmen  were  exhausted  by  enor- 
mous impositions,  the  fields  were  abandoned,  and  cultivated 
grounds  became  woodlands,  and  universal  dismay  prevailed. 
Besides,  the  provinces  were  divided  into  minute  portions  and 
many  presidents  and  prefects  lay  heavy  on  each  territory,  and 
almost  on  every  city.  There  were  many  stewards  and  mas- 
ters and  deputy  presidents,  before  whom  very  few  civil  causes 
came,  but  only  condemnations  and  frequent  forfeitures,  and 
exactions  of  numberless  commodities,  and  I  will  not  say  often 
repeated,  but  perpetual  and  intolerable,  wrongs  in  the  exact- 
ing of  them. 

§  56.    The  Diocletian  Persecution 

The  last  great  persecution  was  preceded  by  a  number  of 
laws  aimed  to  annoy  the  Christians.  On  March  12,  295, 
all  soldiers  in  the  army  were  ordered  to  offer  sacrifice.  In 
296  sacred  books  of  the  Christians  were  sought  for  and  burnt 
at  Alexandria.  In  297  or  298  Christian  persecutions  began 
in  the  army,  but  the  great  persecution  itself  broke  out  in 
303,  as  described  below.     Among  other  reasons  for  energetic 


THE  DIOCLETIAN  PERSECUTION  259 

measures  in  which  Galerius  took  the  lead,  appears  to  have 
been  that  prince's  desire  to  estabhsh  the  unity  of  the  Empire 
upon  a  religious  basis,  which  is  borne  out  by  his  attempts  to 
reorganize  the  heathen  worship  immediately  after  the  cessa- 
tion of  the  persecution.  In  April,  311,  the  edict  of  Galerius, 
known  as  the  Edict  of  the  Three  Emperors,  put  an  official 
end  to  the  persecution.  In  parts  of  the  Empire,  however, 
small  persecutions  took  place  and  the  authorities  attempted 
to  attack  Christianity  without  actually  carrying  on  persecu- 
tions, as  in  the  wide-spread  dissemination  of  the  infamous 
''Acts  of  Pilate,"  which  were  posted  on  walls  and  spread 
through  the  schools.  In  the  territories  of  Constantius  Chlo- 
rus  the  persecution  had  been  very  light,  and  there  was  none 
under  Constantine  who  favored   Christians  from  the  first. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec,  VIII,  and  IX, 
9;  his  Httle  work  On  the  Martyrs  of  Palestine  will  be  found  after  the 
eighth  book.  Lactantius,  De  Mortibus  Persecutorum.  The  principal 
texts  will  be  found  in  Preuschen's  Analecta,  I,  §§  20,  21;  see  also  R. 
Knopf,  Ausgewahlte  Mdrtyreracten. 

(a)  Lactantius,    De  Mortibus  Persecutorum,  12  Jff.     (MSL, 
7  ^213.) 
The  outbreak  of  the  persecution. 

A  fit  and  auspicious  day  was  sought  for  the  accompHsh- 
ment  of  this  undertaking  [i.  e.,  the  persecution  of  the  Chris- 
tians]; and  the  festival  of  the  great  god  Terminus,  celebrated 
on  the  seventh  calends  of  March  [Feb.  23],  was  chosen,  to 
put  an  end,  as  it  were,  to  this  religion, 

"That  day  the  first  of  death,  was  first  of  evil's  cause"  (Vergil), 

and  cause  of  evils  which  befell  not  only  the  Christians  but 
the  whole  world.  When  that  day  dawned,  in  the  eighth 
consulship  of  Diocletian  and  seventh  of  Maximianus,  sud- 
denly, while  it  was  hardly  light,  the  prefect,  together  with 
the  chief  commanders,  tribunes,  and  officers  of  the  treasury, 
came  to  the  church  [in  Nicomedia],  and  when  the  gates  had 


26o     CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

been  forced  open  they  sought  for  an  image  of  God.  The 
books  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  found  and  burnt;  the  spoil 
was  given  to  all.  Rapine,  confusion,  and  tumult  reigned. 
Since  the  church  was  situated  on  rising  ground,  and  was 
visible  from  the  palace,  Diocletian  and  Galerius  stood  there 
as  if  on  a  watch-tower  and  disputed  long  together  whether  it 
ought  to  be  set  on  fire.  The  opinion  of  Diocletian  prevailed, 
for  he  feared  lest,  when  so  great  a  fire  should  once  be  started, 
the  city  might  be  burnt;  for  many  and  large  buildings  sur- 
rounded the  church  on  all  sides.  Then  the  praetorian  guard, 
in  battle  array,  came  with  axes  and  other  iron  instruments, 
and  having  been  let  loose  everywhere,  in  a  few  hours  they 
levelled  that  very  lofty  building  to  the  ground. 

Ch.  13.  Next  day  the  edict  was  pubHshed  ordaining  that 
men  of  the  Christian  religion  should  be  deprived  of  all  honors 
and  dignities;  and  also  that  they  should  be  subjected  to  tor- 
ture, of  whatsoever  rank  or  position  they  might  be;  and  that 
every  suit  of  law  should  be  entertained  against  them;  but  they, 
on  the  other  hand,  could  not  bring  any  suit  for  any  wrong, 
adultery,  or  theft;  and  finally,  that  they  should  have  neither 
freedom  nor  the  right  of  suffrage.  A  certain  person,  al- 
though not  properly,  yet  with  a  brave  soul,  tore  down  this 
edict  and  cut  it  up,  saying  in  derision:  ''These  are  the  triumphs 
of  Goths  and  Samaritans."  Having  been  brought  to  judg- 
ment, he  was  not  only  tortured,  but  was  burnt  in  the  legal 
manner,  and  with  admirable  patience  he  was  consumed  to 
ashes. 

Ch.  14.  But  Galerius  was  not  satisfied  with  the  terms  of 
the  edict,  and  sought  another  way  to  gain  over  the  Emperor. 
That  he  might  urge  him  to  excess  of  cruelty  in  persecution, 
he  employed  private  agents  to  set  the  palace  on  fire;  and 
when  some  part  of  it  had  been  burnt  the  Christians  were 
accused  as  public  enemies,  and  the  very  appellation  of 
Christian  grew  odious  on  account  of  its  connection  with  the 
fire  in  the  palace.  It  was  said  that  the  Christians,  in  con- 
cert with  the  eunuchs,  had  plotted  to  destroy  the  princes, 


THE  DIOCLETIAN  PERSECUTION  261 

and  that  both  the  emperors  had  well-nigh  been  burnt  alive 
in  their  own  palace.  Diocletian,  who  always  wanted  to 
appear  shrewd  and  intelligent,  suspecting  nothing  of  the 
deception,  but  inflamed  with  anger,  began  immediately  to 
torture  all  his  domestics. 

(b)  Eusebius,  HisL  Ec,  VIII,  2;  6  :  8.     (MSG,  20  :  753.) 

The  edicts  of  Diocletian. 

The  first  passage  occurs,  with  slight  variations,  in  the  introduction 
to  the  work,  On  the  Martyrs  of  Palestine. 

Ch.  2.  It  was  in  the  nineteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Dio- 
cletian, in  the  month  Dystus,  called  March  by  the  Romans, 
when  the  feast  of  the  Saviour's  passion  was  near  at  hand,  that 
royal  edicts  were  pubHshed  everywhere  commanding  that 
the  churches  be  levelled  to  the  ground,  the  Scriptures  be 
destroyed  by  fire,  and  all  holding  places  of  honor  be  branded 
with  infamy,  and  that  the  household  servants,  if  they  per- 
sisted in  the  profession  of  Christianity,  be  deprived  of  their 
freedom. 

Such  was  the  original  edict  against  us.  But  not  long  after 
other  decrees  were  issued,  commanding  that  all  the  rulers  of 
the  churches  everywhere  should  be  first  thrown  into  prison, 
and  afterward  compelled  by  every  means  to  sacrifice. 

Ch.  6  : 8.  Such  things  occurred  in  Nicomedia  at  the 
beginning  of  the  persecution.  But  not  long  after,  as  per- 
sons in  the  country  called  Melitina  and  others  throughout 
Syria  attempted  to  usurp  the  government,  a  royal  edict  com- 
manded that  the  rulers  of  the  churches  everywhere  be  thrown 
into  prison  and  bonds.  What  was  to  be  seen  after  this 
exceeds  all  description.  A  vast  multitude  were  imprisoned 
in  every  place;  and  the  prisons  everywhere,  which  had  long 
before  been  prepared  for  murderers  and  grave-robbers,  were 
filled  with  bishops,  presbyters  and  deacons,  readers  and 
exorcists,  so  that  room  was  no  longer  left  in  them  for  those 
condemned  for  crimes.  And  as  other  decrees  followed  the 
first,  directing  that  those  in  prison,  if  they  sacrificed,  should 


262      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

be  permitted  to  depart  from  the  prison  in  freedom,  but  that 
those  who  refused  should  be  harassed  with  many  tortures, 
how  could  any  one  again  number  the  multitude  of  martyrs  in 
every  province,  and  especially  those  in  Africa  and  Maure- 
tania,  and  Thebais  and  Egypt  ? 

(c)  Edict  of  Galerius,  A.  D.  311.  Eusebius,  ffi^/.  £c.,  VIII, 
17.     (MSG,  20  :  792.)     Cf.  Preuschen,  Analecta,  1,  §  21:5. 

This  may  also  be  found  in  Lactantius,  De  Mortihus  Persecutorum, 
ch.  34.  It  is  known  as  the  ''Edict  of  Three  Emperors,"  as  it  was  issued 
from  Nicomedia  in  the  name  of  Galerius,  Constantine,  and  Licinius. 
The  date  is  April  30,  311.  By  it  the  persecution  was  not  wholly  ended. 
Galerius  died  in  the  next  month,  but  Maximinus  Daza  resumed  the 
persecution.  There  was  for  six  months,  however,  some  mitigation  of 
the  persecutions  in  the  East,  granted  at  the  request  of  Constantine. 

Amongst  our  other  measures,  which  we  are  always  making 
for  the  use  and  profit  of  the  commonwealth,  we  have  hitherto 
endeavored  to  bring  all  things  into  conformity  with  the 
ancient  laws  and  public  order  of  the  Romans,  and  to  bring 
it  about  also  that  the  Christians,  who  have  abandoned  the 
religion  of  their  ancestors,  should  return  to  sound  reason. 
For  in  some  way  such  wilfulness  has  seized  the  Christians 
and  such  folly  possessed  them  that  they  do  not  follow  those 
constitutions  of  the  ancients,  which  peradventure  their  own 
ancestors  first  established,  but  entirely  according  to  their 
own  judgment  and  as  it  pleased  them  they  were  making  such 
laws  for  themselves  as  they  would  observe,  and  in  different 
places  were  assembling  various  sorts  of  people.  In  short, 
when  our  command  was  issued  that  they  were  to  betake 
themselves  to  the  institutions  of  the  ancients,  many  of  them 
were  subdued  by  danger,  many  also  were  ruined.  Yet  when 
great  numbers  of  them  held  to  their  determination,  and  we 
saw  that  they  neither  gave  worship  and  due  reverence  to  the 
gods  nor  yet  regarded  the  God  of  the  Christians,  we  there- 
fore, mindful  of  our  most  mild  clemency  and  of  the  unbroken 
custom  whereby  we  are  accustomed  to  grant  pardon  to  all 
men,  have  thought  that  in  this  case  also  speediest  indulgence 


THE   DIOCLETIAN  PERSECUTION  263 

ought  to  be  granted  to  them,  that  the  Christians  might  exist 
again  and  might  establish  their  gatherings,  yet  so  that  they 
do  nothing  contrary  to  good  order.  By  another  letter  we 
shall  signify  to  magistrates  how  they  are  to  proceed.  Where- 
fore, in  accordance  with  this  our  indulgence,  they  ought  to 
pray  their  God  for  our  good  estate,  for  that  of  the  common- 
wealth, and  for  their  own,  that  the  commonwealth  may  endure 
on  every  side  unharmed  and  that  they  may  be  able  to  live 
securely  in  their  own  homes. 

{d)  Constantine,  Edict  of  Milan,  A.  D.  313,  in  Lactantius, 
De  Mortihus  Persecutorum,  48.  (MSL,  7  :  267.)  See  also 
Eusebius.  HisL  Ec,  X,  5  :  2.     (MSG,  20  :  880.) 

The  so-called  Edict  of  Milan,  granting  toleration  to  the  Christians, 
is  not  the  actual  edict,  but  a  letter  addressed  to  a  prefect  and  referring 
to  the  edict,  which  probably  was  much  briefer.  The  following  pas- 
sage is  translated  from  the  emended  text  of  Lactantius,  as  given  in 
Preuschen,  op.  cit.,  I,  §  22  14. 

When  I,  Constantine  Augustus,  and  I,  Licinius  Augustus, 
had  happily  met  together  at  Milan,  and  were  having  under 
consideration  all  things  which  concern  the  advantage  and 
security  of  the  State,  we  thought  that,  among  other  things 
which  seemed  Hkely  to  profit  men  generally,  we  ought,  in  the 
very  first  place,  to  set  in  order  the  conditions  of  the  rever- 
ence paid  to  the  Divinity  by  giving  to  the  Christians  and  all 
others  full  permission  to  follow  whatever  worship  any  man 
had  chosen;  whereby  whatever  divinity  there  is  in  heaven 
may  be  benevolent  and  propitious  to  us,  and  to  all  placed 
under  our  authority.  Therefore  we  thought  we  ought,  with 
sound  counsel  and  very  right  reason,  to  lay  down  this  law, 
that  we  should  in  no  way  refuse  to  any  man  any  legal  right 
who  has  given  up  his  mind  either  to  the  observance  of  Chris- 
tianity or  to  that  worship  which  he  personally  feels  best  suited 
to  himself;  to  the  end  that  the  Supreme  Divinity,  whose 
worship  we  freely  follow,  may  continue  in  all  things  to  grant 
us  his  accustomed  favor  and  good- will.  Wherefore  your 
devotion  should  know  that  it  is  our  pleasure  that  all  pro- 


264      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

visions  whatsoever  which  have  appeared  in  documents  hitherto 
directed  to  your  office  regarding  Christians  and  which  ap- 
peared utterly  improper  and  opposed  to  our  clemency  should 
be  abolished,  and  that  every  one  of  those  men  who  have  the 
same  wish  to  observe  Christian  worship  may  now  freely  and 
unconditionally  endeavor  to  observe  the  same  without  any 
annoyance  or  molestation.  These  things  we  thought  it  well 
to  signify  in  the  fullest  manner  to  your  carefulness,  that  you 
might  know  that  we  have  given  free  and  absolute  permission 
to  the  said  Christians  to  practise  their  worship.  And  when 
you  perceive  that  we  have  granted  this  to  the  said  Christians, 
your  devotion  understands  that  to  others  also  a  similarly 
full  and  free  permission  for  their  own  worship  and  observance 
is  granted,  for  the  quiet  of  our  times,  so  that  every  man  may 
have  freedom  in  the  practice  of  whatever  worship  he  has 
chosen.  And  these  things  were  done  by  us  that  nothing  be 
taken  away  from  any  honor  or  form  of  worship.  Moreover, 
in  regard  to  the  Christians,  we  have  thought  fit  to  ordain 
this  also,  that  if  any  appear  to  have  bought,  either  from  our 
exchequer  or  from  others,  the  places  in  which  they  were 
accustomed  formerly  to  assemble,  and  concerning  which  defi- 
nite orders  have  been  given  before  now,  and  that  by  letters 
sent  to  your  office,  the  same  be  restored  to  the  Christians, 
setting  aside  all  delay  and  dispute,  without  payment  or  de- 
mand of  price.  Those  also  who  have  obtained  them  by  gift 
shall  restore  them  in  like  manner  without  delay  to  the  said 
Christians;  and  those,  moreover,  who  have  bought  them, 
as  well  as  those  who  have  obtained  them  by  gift,  if  they 
request  anything  of  our  benevolence,  they  shall  apply  to  the 
deputy  that  order  may  be  taken  for  them  too  by  our  clemency. 
All  these  must  be  deHvered  over  at  once  and  without  delay 
by  your  intervention  to  the  corporation  of  the  Christians. 
And  since  the  same  Christians  are  known  to  have  possessed 
not  only  the  places  where  they  are  accustomed  to  assemble, 
but  also  others  belonging  to  their  corporation,  namely,  to  the 
churches  and  not  to  individuals,  all  these  by  the  law  which 


RISE   OF   SCHISMS  265 

we  have  described  above  you  will  order  to  be  restored  without 
any  doubtfulness  or  dispute  to  the  said  Christians — that  is,  to 
their  said  corporations  and  assemblies;  provided  always,  as 
aforesaid,  that  those  who  restore  them  without  price,  as  we 
said,  shall  expect  a  compensation  from  our  benevolence.  In 
all  these  things  you  must  give  the  aforesaid  Christians  your 
most  effective  intervention,  that  our  command  may  be  ful- 
filled as  soon  as  may  be,  and  that  in  this  matter  also  order 
may  be  taken  by  our  clemency  for  the  public  quiet.  And 
may  it  be,  as  already  said,  that  the  divine  favor  which  we 
have  already  experienced  in  so  many  affairs,  shall  continue 
for  all  time  to  give  us  prosperity  and  successes,  together  with 
happiness  for  the  State.  But  that  it  may  be  possible  for 
the  nature  of  this  decree  and  of  our  benevolence  to  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  all  men,  it  will  be  your  duty  by  a  proc- 
lamation of  your  own  to  pubhsh  everywhere  and  bring  to 
the  notice  of  all  men  this  present  document  when  it  reaches 
you,  that  the  decree  of  this  our  benevolence  may  not  be 
hidden. 


§57.    Rise  of  Schisms  in  Consequence  of  the  Diocle- 
tian Persecution 

The  Diocletian  persecution  and  its  various  continuations, 
on  account  of  the  severity  of  the  persecution  and  its  great 
extent,  seriously  strained  the  organization  of  the  Church  for 
a  time,  and  in  at  least  three  important  Church  centres  gave 
rise  to  schisms,  of  which  two  were  of  some  duration.  The 
causes  for  these  schisms,  as  in  the  case  of  the  schisms  con- 
nected with  the  Decian  persecution,  are  to  be  found  in  the 
confusion  caused  by  the  enforced  absence  of  bishops  from 
their  sees  and  in  the  administration  of  discipHne.  In  the 
latter  point  the  activity  of  the  confessors  no  longer  plays 
any  part,  as  the  authority  of  the  bishops  in  the  various  com- 
munities is  now  undisputed  by  rival.  It  was  a  question  of 
greater  or  less  rigor  in  readmitting  the  lapsed  to  the  com- 


266      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

munion  of  the  Church.  For  the  canons  of  discipHne  in  force 
in  Alexandria,  see  the  Canonical  Epistle  oj  Peter  oj  Alexandria, 
ANF,  VI,  269  /.  (MSG,  18  :  467.)  They  were  regarded 
by  the  rigorist  party  in  Alexandria  as  too  lax.  Of  the  three 
schisms  known  to  have  arisen  from  the  Diocletian  persecu- 
tion, that  in  Alexandria  is  known  as  the  Meletian  schism, 
and  three  selections  are  given  bearing  on  it.  For  the  propo- 
sals of  the  Council  of  Nicaea  to  bring  about  a  settlement 
and  union,  see  the  Epistle  of  the  Synod  of  Niccea,  Socrates, 
Hist.  Eg.,  I,  9  (given  below,  §  61,  //,  h).  The  schism  continued 
until  the  fifth  century.  The  schism  at  Rome,  known  as  the 
schism  of  Heraclius,  was  much  less  important.  It  was  caused 
by  the  party  advocating  greater  laxity  in  discipKne,  and  was 
for  a  time  difficult  to  deal  with  on  account  of  long  vacancies 
in  the  Roman  episcopate.  The  duration  of  the  schism  could 
not  have  been  long,  but  the  solution  of  the  questions  raised 
by  it  is  unknown.  In  fact,  the  history  of  the  Roman  church 
is  exceedingly  obscure  in  the  half-century  preceding  the 
Council  of  Nicaea.  The  third  schism,  that  of  the  Donatists 
in  North  Africa,  which  broke  out  in  Carthage,  was  the  most 
considerable  in  the  Church  before  the  schisms  arising  from 
the  christological  controversies.  For  the  Donatist  schism, 
see  §§  61,  67,  72. 

{a)  Epistle  of  Hesychius,  PachomiuSj  Theodorus,  and  Fhileas 
to  Meletius.     (MSG,  10  :  1565.) 

The  Meletian  schism. 

The  following  epistle  was  written  in  the  name  of  these  four  bishops, 
probably  by  Phileas,  bishop  of  Thmuis,  one  of  the  number,  to  Meletius, 
bishop  of  Lycopolis.  The  four  were  in  prison  when  it  was  written. 
It  is  the  most  important  document  bearing  on  the  schism,  and  is 
important  as  setting  forth  the  generally  accepted  legal  opinion  of  the 
time  regarding  ordination  and  the  authority  of  bishops.  The  docu- 
ment exists  only  in  a  Latin  translation  from  a  Greek  original,  and 
appears  to  form,  with  the  two  following  fragments,  a  continuous  narra- 
tive, possibly  a  history  of  the  Church,  but  nothing  further  is  known 
of  it.  For  an  account  of  the  Meletian  schism  see  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec, 
I,  6/.  The  text  of  these  selections  bearing  on  the  Meletian  schism  is 
to  be  found  in  Routh,  op.  cit.,  IV,  91  J. 


RISE   OF  SCHISMS  267 

Hesychius,  Pachomius,  Theodorus,  and  Phileas  to  Meletius, 
our  friend  and  fellow-minister  in  the  Lord,  greeting.  In 
simple  faith,  regarding  as  uncertain  the  things  which  have  been 
heard  concerning  thee,  since  some  have  come  to  us  and  cer- 
tain things  are  reported  foreign  to  divine  order  and  ecclesias- 
tical rule  which  are  being  attempted,  yea,  rather,  which  are 
being  done  by  thee,  we  were  not  willing  to  credit  them  when 
we  thought  of  the  audacity  implied  by  their  magnitude,  and 
we  thought  that  they  were  imcertain  attempts.  But  since 
so  many  coming  to  us  at  the  present  time  have  lent  some 
credibiHty  to  these  reports,  and  have  not  hesitated  to  attest 
them  as  facts,  we,  greatly  astonished,  have  been  compelled 
to  write  this  letter  to  thee.  And  what  agitation  and  sad- 
ness have  been  caused  to  us  all  in  common  and  to  each  of  us 
individually  by  the  ordination  performed  by  thee  in  parishes 
not  pertaining  to  thee,  we  are  unable  sufficiently  to  express. 
We  have  not  delayed,  however,  by  a  short  statement,  to  prove 
thy  practice  wrong. 

In  the  law  of  our  fathers  and  forefathers,  of  which  thou  also 
are  not  thyself  ignorant,  it  is  estabhshed,  according  to  the 
divine  and  ecclesiastical  order  (for  it  is  all  for  the  good  pleas- 
ure of  God  and  the  zealous  regard  for  better  things),  that  it 
has  been  determined  and  settled  by  them  that  it  is  not  law- 
ful for  any  bishop  to  perform  ordinations  in  other  parishes 
than  his  own.  This  law  is  exceedingly  important  and  wisely 
devised.  For,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  but  right  that  the  con- 
versation and  Hfe  of  those  who  are  ordained  should  be  ex- 
amined with  great  care;  and,  in  the  second  place,  that  all 
confusion  and  turbulence  should  be  done  away  with.  For 
every  one  shall  have  enough  to  do  in  managing  his  own  parish, 
and  -in  finding,  with  great  care  and  many  anxieties,  suitable 
subordinates  among  those  with  whom  he  has  passed  his  whole 
life,  and  who  have  been  trained  under  his  hands.  But  thou, 
considering  none  of  these  things,  nor  regarding  the  future, 
nor  considering  the  law  of  our  holy  Fathers  and  those  who 
have  put  on  Christ  in  long  succession,  nor  the  honor  of  our 


268      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

great  bishop  and  father,  Peter/  on  whom  we  all  depend  in 
the  hope  which  we  have  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  nor  softened 
by  our  imprisonments  and  trials,  and  daily  and  multipHed 
reproaches,  nor  the  oppressions  and  distress  of  all,  hast  ven- 
tured on  subverting  all  things  at  once.  And  what  means 
will  be  left  for  thee  for  justifying  thyself  with  respect  to  these 
things? 

But  perhaps  thou  wilt  say,  I  did  this  to  prevent  many  from 
being  drawn  away  with  the  ur^belief  of  many,  because  the 
flocks  were  in  need  and  forsaken,  there  being  no  pastor  with 
them.  Well,  but  it  is  most  certain  that  they  were  in  no  such 
destitution;  in  the  first  place,  because  there  were  many  going 
among  them  and  able  to  visit  them;  and,  in  the  second  place, 
even  if  there  were  some  things  neglected  by  them,  represen- 
tation should  have  come  from  the  people,  and  we  should 
have  duly  considered  the  matter.  But  they  knew  that  they 
were  in  no  want  of  ministers,  and  therefore  they  did  not  come 
to  seek  thee.  They  knew  that  either  we  were  wont  to  warn 
them  from  such  complaint  or  there  was  done,  with  all  care- 
fulness, what  seemed  profitable;  for  it  was  done  under  cor- 
rection and  all  was  considered  with  well-approved  honesty. 
Thou,  however,  giving  such  careful  attention  to  the  deceits 
of  certain  men  and  their  vain  words,^  hast,  as  it  were,  stealthily 
leaped  forward  to  the  performance  of  ordinations.  For  if, 
indeed,  those  accompanying  thee  constrained  thee  to  this 
and  compelled  thee  and  were  ignorant  of  the  ecclesiastical 
order,  thou  oughtest  to  have  followed  the  rule  and  have  in- 
formed us  by  letter;  and  in  that  way  what  seemed  expedient 
would  have  been  done.  And  if  perchance  some  persuaded 
thee  to  credit  their  story,  who  said  to  thee  that  it  was  all  over 
with  us — a  matter  which  could  not  have  been  unknown  to 
thee,  because  there  were  many  passing  and  repassing  by  us 
who  might  visit  thee — even  if  this  had  been  so,  yet  oughtest 
thou  to  have  waited  for  the  judgment  of  the  superior  father 
and  his  allowance  of  this  thing.     But  thinking  nothing  of 

1  Bishop  of  Alexandria.  ^  See  next  selection. 


RISE   OF   SCHISMS  269 

these  matters,  and  hoping  something  different,  or  rather 
having  no  care  for  us,  thou  hast  provided  certain  rulers  for 
the  people.  For  now  we  learn  that  there  are  also  divisions, 
because  thy  unwarrantable  ordination  displeased  many. 

And  thou  wert  not  readily  persuaded  to  delay  such  pro- 
cedure or  restrain  thy  purpose,  no,  not  even  by  the  word  of 
the  Apostle  Paul,  the  most  blessed  seer  and  the  man  who  put 
on  Christ,  the  Apostle  of  us  all;  for  he,  in  writing  to  his  dearly 
loved  Timothy,  says:  ''Lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man, 
neither  be  partaker  of  other  men's  sins."  [I  Tim.  5  :  22.] 
And  thus  he  at  once  shows  his  own  consideration  of  him,  and 
gives  his  example  and  exhibits  the  law  according  to  which, 
with  all  carefulnesss  and  caution,  candidates  are  chosen  for 
the  honor  of  ordination.  We  make  this  declaration  to  thee, 
that  in  the  future  thou  mayest  study  to  keep  within  the  safe 
and  salutary  limits  of  the  law. 

(b)  Fragment  on  the  Meletian  Schism.     (MSG,  10  :  1567.) 

For  the  connection  of  the  Meletians  with  Arianism,  see  Socrates, 
Eist.  Ec,  I,  6.    Text  in  Routh,  op.  cit.,  IV,  94. 

Meletius  received  and  read  this  epistle,  and  he  neither 
wrote  a  reply,  nor  repaired  to  them  in  prison,  nor  went  to  the 
blessed  Peter  [bishop  of  Alexandria].  But  when  all  these 
bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons  had  suffered  in  the  prison,^ 
he  at  once  entered  Alexandria.  Now  in  that  city  there 
was  a  certain  person,  Isidorus  by  name,  turbulent  in  char- 
acter, and  possessed  with  the  ambition  of  being  a  teacher. 
And  there  was  also  a  certain  Arius,  who  wore  the  habit  of 
piety  and  was  in  like  manner  possessed  with  the  ambition 
of  being  a  teacher.  And  when  they  discovered  the  object  of 
Meletius's  passion  and  what  it  was  he  sought,  hastening  to 
him  and  regarding  with  malice  the  episcopal  authority  of  the 
blessed  Peter,  that  the  aim  and  desire  of  Meletius  might  be 
m.ade  manifest,  they  discovered  to  Meletius  certain  presby- 
ters, then  in  hiding,  to  whom  the  blessed  Peter  had  given 

^  Diocletian  persecution,  A.  D.  306. 


270      CHURCH   CONSOLIDATION:  A.  D.  200-324 

authority  to  act  as  diocesan  visitors  for  Alexandria.  And 
Meletius,  recommending  them  to  improve  the  opportunity- 
given  them  for  rectifying  their  error,  suspended  them  for  a 
time,  and  by  his  authority  ordained  two  persons  in  their 
places,  one  of  whom  was  in  prison  and  the  other  in  the  mines. 
On  learning  these  things,  the  blessed  Peter,  with  much  en- 
durance, wrote  to  the  people  of  Alexandria  in  the  following 
terms.     [See  next  selection.] 

(c)  Peter  of  Alexandria.  Epistle  to  the  Church  in  Alex- 
andria.    (MSG,  i8  :  510.) 

For  Peter  of  Alexandria,  see  DCB.  Peter  was  in  hiding  when  he 
wrote  the  following  to  the  Alexandrian  church  in  306.  He  died  312 
as  a  martyr. 

Peter  to  the  brethren  in  the  Lord,  beloved  and  established 
in  the  faith  of  God,  peace.  Since  I  have  discovered  that 
Meletius  acts  in  no  way  for  the  common  good,  for  he  does 
not  approve  the  letter  of  the  most  holy  bishops  and  martyrs, 
and  invading  my  parish,  has  assumed  so  much  to  himself  as 
to  endeavor  to  separate  from  my  authority  the  priests  and 
those  who  had  been  intrusted  with  visiting  the  needy,  and, 
giving  proof  of  his  desire  for  pre-eminence,  has  ordained  in 
the  prison  several  unto  himself;  now  take  ye  heed  to  this 
and  hold  no  communion  with  him,  until  I  meet  him  in  com- 
pany with  some  wise  men,  and  see  what  designs  they  are 
which  he  has  thought  upon.     Fare  ye  well. 

{d)  Epitaph  of  Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Rome.     Cf.  Kirch,  n.  534. 

Schism  of  Heraclius. 

The  following  epitaph  was  placed  on  the  tomb  of  Eusebius,  bishop 
of  Rome  (April  18  to  August  17,  310  A.  D.),  by  Damasus,  bishop  of 
Rome  (366-384.) 

I,  Damasus,  have  made  this: 

Heraclius  forbade  the  fallen  to  lament  their  sin, 

Eusebius  taught  the  wretched  ones  to  weep  for  their  crimes. 

The  people  was  divided  into  parties  by  the  increasing  madness. 


RISE  OF  SCHISMS  271 

Sedition,  bloodshed,  war,  discord,  strife  arose. 

At  once  they  were  equally  smitten  by  the  ferocity  of  the 

tyrant.^ 
Although  the  guide  of  the  Church^  maintained  intact  the 

bonds  of  peace. 
He  endured  exile  joyful  under  the  Lord  as  judge. 
And  gave  up  this  earthly  life  on  the  Trinacrian  shore.^ 
^  Maxentius.  2  Eusebius.  3  Sicily. 


THE    SECOND    DIVISION   OF   ANCIENT 
CHRISTIANITY 

THE    CHURCH    UNDER    THE    CHRISTIAN   EM- 
PIRE:   FROM    312    TO    CIRCA    750 

The  second  division  of  the  history  of  ancient  Christianity, 
or  Christianity  under  the  influence  of  the  Graeco-Roman  type 
of  culture,  begins  with  the  sole  rule  of  Constantine,  A.  D.  324, 
or  his  sole  reign  in  the  West,  A.  D.  312,  and  extends  to  the 
beginning  of  the  Middle  Ages,  or  that  period  in  which  the 
Germanic  nations  assumed  the  leading  role  in  the  political 
life  of  western  Europe,  The  end  of  this  division  of  Church 
history  may  be  placed,  at  the  latest,  about  the  middle  of  the 
eighth  century,  as  the  time  when  the  authority  of  the  Eastern 
Empire  ceased  to  affect  materially  the  fortunes  of  the  West. 
But  it  is  impossible  to  name  any  year  or  reign  or  political 
event  as  of  such  outstanding  importance  as  to  make  it  a 
terminus  ad  quern  for  the  division  which  will  command  the 
suffrages  of  all  as  the  boundary  between  the  ancient  and  the 
mediaeval  epochs  of  history. 

The  second  division  of  ancient  Christianity  may  be  sub- 
divided into  three  periods: 

I.  The  Imperial  State  Church  of  the  Undivided  Empire,  or 

until  the  Death  of  Theodosius  the  Great,  or  to  395. 

II.  The  Church  in  the  Divided  Empire  until  the  Collapse  of 

the  Western  Empire  and  the  Schism  between  the 
East  and  the  West  arising  out  of  the  Monophysite 
Controversies,  or  to  circa  500. 

III.  The  Dissolution  of  the  Imperial  Church  of  the  West 

and  the  Transition  to  the  Middle  Ages. 
272 


THE  CHURCH  FROM  312  TO  CIRCA  750     273 

In  the  third  period  is  to  be  placed  the  beginnings  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  as  the  German  invaders  had  long  before  500 
established  their  kingdoms  and  had  begun  to  dominate  the 
affairs  of  the  West.  But  the  connection  of  the  Church  of 
the  West,  or  rather  of  Italy,  with  the  East  was  long  so  close 
that  the  condition  of  the  Church  is  more  that  of  a  dissolution 
of  the  ancient  imperial  State  Church  than  of  a  building  up 
of  the  mediaeval  Church.  At  the  same  time,  the  transition 
to  the  Middle  Ages,  so  far  as  the  Church  is  concerned  at  least, 
takes  place  under  the  influence  of  the  ancient  tradition,  and 
institutions  are  established  in  which  the  leading  elements, 
taken  from  ancient  life,  are  not  yet  transformed  by  Germanic 
ideas.  The  East  knew  no  Middle  Age.  For  a  history  of  the 
Eastern  Church  other  divisions  would  have  to  be  made,  but 
in  a  history  in  which,  for  practical  reasons,  the  development 
is  traced  in  Western  Christianity,  the  affairs  of  the  Eastern 
Church  must  be  treated  as  subordinate  to  those  of  Western 
Christianity. 

For  the  second  division  of  the  history  of  ancient  Chris- 
tianity, the  principal  sources  available  in  English  are  the 
translations  in  A  Select  Library  of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene 
Fathers  of  the  Christian  Church.  Edited  by  Ph.  Schaff  and  H. 
Wace.  The  First  Series  of  this  collection  (PNF,  ser.  I)  con- 
tains the  principal  works  of  Augustine  and  Chrysostom. 
The  Second  Series  (PNF,  ser.  II)  is  for  historical  study  even 
more  valuable,  and  gives,  generally  with  very  able  introduc- 
tions and  excellent  bibliographies,  the  most  important  works 
of  many  of  the  leading  patristic  writers,  including  the  prin- 
cipal ecclesiastical  historians,  as  well  as  Athanasius,  Gregory 
of  Nazianzus,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Basil  the  Great,  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem,  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  Jerome,  Rufinus,  Cassian,  Vin- 
cent of  Lerins,  Leo  the  Great,  Gregory  the  Great,  and  others. 
These  translations  are  in  part  fresh  versions,  and  in  part 
older  versions  but  sHghtly,  if  at  all,  revised,  taken  from  the 
Library  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  anterior  to 
the  Division  of  the  East  and  West,  Oxford,  1838,  et  seq. 


274    THE   CHURCH  FROM   312  TO   CIRCA  750 

For  the  period  before  the  outbreak  of  the  great  christo- 
logical  controversies,  the  ecclesiastical  historians  are  of  great 
value.  There  are  no  less  than  four  continuations  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  History  of  Eusebius  accessible:  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal histories  of  Socrates,  324-439  (ed.  R.  Hussey,  Oxford, 
1853);  of  Sozomen,  324-425  (ed.  R.  Hussey,  Oxford,  i860); 
of  Rufinus,  324-395,  which  is  appended  to  a  Latin  version  or 
rather  revised  and  "edited"  Latin  version  of  Eusebius;  of 
Theodoret,  323-428  (ed.  Gaisford,  Oxford,  1854).  Fragments 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  Arian  Philostorgius,  from 
the  appearance  of  Arius  as  a  teacher  until  423,  have  been  trans- 
lated and  are  to  be  found  in  Bohn's  Ecclesiastical  Library. 
For  the  period  after  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  there 
is  no  such  abundance,  but  Evagrius,  of  whose  history  (ed. 
Parmentier  and  Bidez,  London,  1898)  there  is  a  translation 
in  Bohn's  Ecclesiastical  Library,  though  not  in  PNF,  is  of 
great  value  as  he  gives  many  original  documents;  and  a  por- 
tion of  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  John  of  Ephesus  (trans,  by 
R.  P.  Smith,  Oxford,  i860)  carries  the  history  to  about  600. 
There  are  also' works  devoted  to  the  history  of  the  West  by 
Gregory  of  Tours,  the  Venerable  Bede,  andPaulus  Diaconus, 
and  others  of  the  greatest  value  for  the  third  period  of  this 
division.     They  will  be  mentioned  in  their  place. 

As  the  series  of  the  great  church  councils  begins  with  the 
Christian  Empire,  the  History  of  the  Councils,  by  Hefele,  be- 
comes indispensable  to  the  student  of  ecclesiastical  history, 
not  only  for  its  narrative  but  for  the  sources  epitomized  or 
given  in  full.  It  has  been  translated  into  English  as  far  as 
the  close  of  the  eighth  century,  or  well  into  the  beginnings 
of  the  history  of  the  mediaeval  Church.  The  new  French 
translation  should  be  used  if  possible  as  it  contains  valu- 
able additional  notes.  In  connection  with  Hefele  may  be 
used: 

Percival,  The  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils,  in  PNF,  ser.  II, 
vol.  XIV. 

Wm.  Bright,  Notes  on  the  Canons  of  the  First  Four  General 


THE  CHURCH  FROM  312  TO   CIRCA  750     275 

Councils^  1882,  should  be  consulted  for  this  period.  Bruns, 
Op.  cit.j  and  Lauchert,  op.  cit.,  give  texts  only. 

The  two  great  collections  of  secular  laws  are: 

Codex  TheodosianuSj  ed.  Mommsen  and  Meyer,  Berlin,  1905. 

Corpus  Juris  Civilis,  ed.  Kriiger,  Mommsen,  Schoell,  and 
Knoll,  Berlin,  1 899-1 902. 

The  Cambridge  Medieval  History ^  vol.  I,  191 2,  covers  the 
period  beginning  with  Constantine  and  extending  to  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fifth  century.  It  contains  valuable  bibHog- 
raphies  of  a  more  discriminating  character  than  those  in  the 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  and  render  bibliographical  ref- 
erences unnecessary.  To  this  the  student  is  accordingly 
referred  for  such  matters.  The  second  volume  of  this  work 
will  cover  the  period  500-850. 


PERIOD    I 

THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH  OF  THE  UNDI- 
VIDED EMPIRE,  OR  UNTIL  THE  DEATH  OF 
THEODOSIUS  THE  GREAT,  395 

The  history  of  the  Church  in  the  first  period  of  the  second 
division  of  the  history  of  ancient  Christianity  has  to  deal 
primarily  with  three  lines  of  development,  viz.:  first,  the 
relation  of  the  Church  to  the  imperial  authority  and  the 
religious  forces  of  the  times,  whereby  the  Church  became 
established  as  the  sole  authorized  religion  of  the  Empire,  and 
heathenism  and  heresy  were  prohibited  by  law;  secondly, 
the  development  of  the  doctrinal  system  of  the  Church  until 
the  end  of  the  Arian  controversy,  whereby  the  full  and  eternal 
deity  of  the  Son  was  established  as  the  Catholic  faith;  thirdly, 
the  development  of  the  constitution,  the  fixation  of  the  lead- 
ing ecclesiastical  conceptions,  and  the  adaptation  of  the  sys- 
tem of  the  Church  to  the  practical  needs  of  the  times.  The 
entire  period  may  be  divided  into  two  main  parts  by  the 
reign  of  Julian  the  Apostate  (361-363);  and  the  reign  of  Con- 
stantine  as  Emperor  of  the  West  (312-324)  may  be  regarded 
as  a  prelude  to  the  main  part  of  the  history.  On  the  death 
of  Theodosius  the  Great  in  395,  the  Empire  became  perma- 
nently divided,  and  though  in  the  second  period  the  courses 
of  the  Church  in  the  East  and  in  the  West  may  be  treated  to 
some  extent  together,  yet  the  fortunes,  interests,  and  prob- 
lems of  the  two  divisions  of  the  Church  begin  to  diverge. 

CHAPTER  I.  THE  CHURCH  AND  EMPIRE  UNDER 
CONSTANTINE 

Constantine  was  the  heir  to  the  political  system  of  Dio- 
cletian.    The  same  line  of  development  was  followed  by  him 

276 


THE  EMPIRE  UNDER  CONSTANTINE       277 

and  his  sons,  and  with  increasing  severity  the  burden  pressed 
upon  the  people.  But  the  Church,  which  had  been  fiercely 
persecuted  by  Diocletian  and  Galerius,  became  the  object 
of  imperial  favor  under  Constantine.  At  the  same  time  in 
many  parts  of  the  Empire,  especially  in  the  West,  the  heathen 
religion  was  rooted  in  the  affections  of  the  people  and  every- 
where it  was  bound  up  with  the  forms  of  state.  The  new 
problems  that  confronted  Constantine  on  his  accession  to 
sole  authority  in  the  West,  and  still  more  when  he  became 
sole  Emperor,  were  of  an  ecclesiastical  rather  than  a  civil 
character.  In  the  administration  of  the  Empire  he  followed 
the  lines  laid  down  by  Diocletian  (§  58).  But  in  favoring 
the  Church  he  had  to  avoid  alienating  the  heathen  majority. 
This  he  did  by  gradually  and  cautiously  extending  to  the 
Church  privileges  which  the  heathen  religion  had  enjoyed 
(§  59),  and  with  the  utmost  caution  repressing  those  elements 
in  heathenism  which  might  be  plausibly  construed  as  inimi- 
cal to  the  new  order  in  the  state  (§  60).  At  the  same  time, 
Constantine  found  in  the  application  of  his  policy  to  actual 
conditions  that  he  could  not  favor  every  religious  sect  that 
assumed  the  name  of  Christian.  He  must  distinguish  be- 
tween claimants  of  his  bounty.  He  must  also  bring  about  a 
unity  in  the  Church  where  it  had  been  threatened  (§61), 
and  repress  what  might  lead  to  schism.  Accordingly  he 
found  himself,  immediately  after  his  accession  to  sole  author- 
ity, engaged  in  ecclesiastical  discussions  and  adjudicating  by 
councils  ecclesiastical  cases  (§  62). 

§  58.    The  Empire  under  Constantine  and  His  Sons 

Constantine  became  sole  Emperor  of  the  West,  312,  and  by 
the  defeat  of  Licinius,  July  23,  324,  sole  ruler  of  the  entire 
Roman  Empire.  On  his  death.  May  22,  337,  his  three  sons 
divided  between  them  the  imperial  dignity:  Constantine  II 
(337-340),  taking  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain;  Constans  (337- 
350)5  Italy,  Africa,  and  lUyria,  and  in  340  receiving  the  share 


278  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

of  Constantine  II;  Constantius  (337-361),  taking  the  East, 
including  Egypt.  Of  these  three  the  ablest  was  Constantius 
who,  after  the  renewed  Persian  war  (337-350),  became,  on 
the  death  of  Constans,  sole  Emperor.  Although  the  imperial 
authority  was  divided  and  the  ecclesiastical  policy  of  each 
Emperor  followed  the  religious  condition  and  theological  com- 
plexion of  his  respective  portion  of  the  Empire,  the  social  con- 
ditions were  everywhere  much  the  same.  There  were  under 
Constantine  and  also  under  his  sons  the  continuation  of  that 
centralization  which  had  already  been  carried  far  by  Dio- 
cletian, the  same  court  ceremonial  and  all  that  went  with  it, 
and  the  development  of  the  bureaucratic  system  of  admin- 
istration. The  economic  conditions  steadily  dechned  as  the 
imperial  system  became  constantly  more  burdensome  {v. 
supra,  §  55),  and  the  changes  in  the  distribution  of  wealth 
and  the  administration  of  landed  property  affected  disas- 
trously large  sections  of  the  populace.  A  characteristic  fea- 
ture of  Roman  society,  which  affected  the  position  of  the 
Church  not  a  little,  was  the  tendency  to  regard  caUings  and 
trades  as  hereditary,  and  by  the  fourth  century  this  was 
enforced  by  law.  The  aim  of  this  legislation  was  to  provide 
workmen  to  care  for  the  great  pubhc  undertakings  for  the 
support  of  the  populace  of  the  cities  and  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  public  business.  This  pohcy  affected  both  the  humble 
artisan  and  the  citizen  of  curial  rank.  The  former,  although 
given  various  privileges,  was  crushed  down  by  being  obliged 
to  continue  in  what  was  often  an  unprofitable  occupation; 
the  latter  was  made  responsible  for  the  taxes  and  various 
public  burdens  which  custom,  gradually  becoming  law,  laid 
upon  him.  Constant  attempt  was  made  by  great  numbers 
to  escape  these  burdens  and  disabilities  by  recourse  to  other 
occupations,  and  especially  to  the  Christian  ministry  with 
its  immunities  (see  §  59,  c).  Constant  legislation  endeavored 
to  prevent  this  and  restore  men  to  their  hereditary  places. 
The  following  extracts  from  the  Theodosian  Code  are  enact- 
ments of  Constantine,  and  are  intended  to  illustrate  the  con- 


THE  EMPIRE  UNDER   CONSTANTINE        279 

dition,  under  that  Emperor,  of  the  law  as  to  hereditary  occu- 
pations and  guilds,  and  the  position  of  the  curiales,  so  as  to 
explain  the  law  as  to  admission  to  the  priesthood. 

(a)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XIII,  5,  i;  A.  D.  314. 

The  Theodosian  Code  was  a  collection  of  law  made  at  the  command 
of  Theodosius  II,  A.  D.  438.  See  §  80.  It  was  intended  to  com- 
prise all  the  laws  of  general  application  made  since  the  accession  of 
Constantine  and  arranged  under  appropriate  titles. 

If  a  shipman  shall  have  been  originally  a  lighterman,  none 
the  less  he  shall  remain  permanently  among  those  among 
whom  it  shall  appear  that  his  parents  had  been. 

(b)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XIII,  5,  3;  A.  D.  319. 

If  any  shipman  shall  have  obtained  surreptitiously  or  in 
any  other  way  immunity,  it  is  our  will  that  he  be  not  at  all 
admitted  to  plead  any  exemption.  But  also  if  any  one  pos- 
sess a  patrimony  liable  to  the  duties  of  a  shipman,  although 
he  may  be  of  higher  dignity,  the  privileges  of  honor  shall  be 
of  no  avail  to  him  in  this  matter,  but  let  him  be  held  to  this 
duty  either  by  the  whole  or  in  proportion.  For  it  is  not  just 
that  when  a  patrimony  liable  to  this  public  duty  has  been 
excused  all  should  not  bear  the  common  burden  in  propor- 
tion to  ability. 

(c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XIV,  4,  i;  A.  D.  334. 

Because  the  guild  of  swineherds  has  fallen  off  to  but  few, 
we  command  that  they  plead  in  the  presence  of  the  Roman 
people,  for  the  defence  should  be  made  to  them  for  whom  the 
burden  was  established.  .  .  .  Therefore  let  them  know  that 
the  personal  property  of  the  swineherds  is  liable  to  pubhc 
burdens  and  let  them  choose  one  of  two  courses :  either  let  them 
retain  the  property  which  is  liable  to  the  functions  of  swine- 
herd, and  let  themselves  be  held  to  the  duty  of  swineherd,  or 
let  them  name  some  suitable  person  whom  they  will,  who  shall 
satisfy  the  same  requirement.  For  we  suffer  no  one  to  be 
exempt  from  the  obligation  of  this  thing,  but  whether  they 


28o  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

have  advanced  in  honors,  or  by  some  fraud  have  escaped,  we 
command  that  they  be  brought  back  and  the  same  thing  per- 
formed, the  Roman  people  being  present  and  witnessing,  and 
we  are  to  be  consulted,  that  we  may  take  note  of  those  who 
make  use  of  these  shifts;  as  for  further  avoidance  of  public 
duties,  it  is  by  no  means  to  be  granted  any,  but  he  who  shall 
have  been  able  to  escape  shall  run  danger  of  his  safety,  the 
privilege  having  been  taken  away  from  him. 

(d)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XII,  i,  ii;  A.  D.  325. 

The  following  laws  illustrate  the  attempts  of  the  curiales  to  escape 
their  burdens. 

Because  some  have  forsaken  the  curiae  and  have  fled  to  the 
camps  of  the  soldiery,  we  prescribe  that  all  who  shall  be  found 
not  yet  indebted  to  the  chief  centurion,  are  to  be  dismissed 
from  the  soldiery  and  returned  to  the  same  curiae;  those  only 
are  to  remain  among  the  soldiery  who  are  retained  on  account 
of  the  necessities  of  the  place  or  the  troop. 

(e)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XII,  i,  12;  A.  D.  325. 

If  any  one  belongs  in  a  larger  or  smaller  town  and  desiring 
to  avoid  the  same,  betakes  himself  to  another  for  the  sake  of 
dwelling  there,  and  shall  have  attempted  to  make  petitions 
concerning  this  or  shall  have  relied  upon  any  sort  of  fraud  that 
he  may  escape  the  birth  from  his  own  city,  let  him  bear  the 
burden  of  the  decurionate  of  both  cities,  of  one  because  it  was 
his  choice,  of  the  other  because  of  his  birth. 

(/)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  2,  3,  cf.  XVI,  2,  6;  A.  D.  326. 

Since  a  constitution  that  has  been  issued  prescribes  that 
thereafter  no  decurion  nor  child  of  a  decurion  or  person  with 
suitable  wealth  and  able  to  support  the  pubKc  burdens  shall 
have  recourse  to  the  name  and  duties  of  the  clergy,  but  only 
those  shall  be  called  to  the  place  of  the  deceased  who  are  of 
small  fortune  and  are  not  held  liable  to  civil  burdens,  we  have 
learned  that  some  have  been  molested,  who  before  the  pro- 


FAVOR  SHOWN  THE   CHURCH  281 

mulgation  of  the  said  law  had  joined  themselves  to  the  com- 
pany of  the  priests.  Therefore  we  decree  that  these  shall  be 
free  from  all  annoyance,  but  those  who  after  the  promulgation 
of  the  law,  to  avoid  their  public  duties  took  recourse  to  the 
number  of  the  clergy,  shall  be  separated  from  that  body  and 
restored  to  their  curial  rank  and  made  liable  for  their  civil 
duties. 

§  59.    Favor  Shown  the  Church  by  Constantine 

Neither  on  his  conversion  nor  on  his  attainment  of  the  sole 
rule  of  the  Empire  did  Constantine  establish  the  Church  as 
the  one  official  rehgion  of  the  State.  The  ruler  himself  pro- 
fessed the  Christian  religion  and  neither  abolished  the  former 
religion  of  the  State  nor  disestablished  it.  But  he  granted  to 
his  own  religion  favors  similar  to  those  enjoyed  by  the  heathen 
religious  systems  (a-d),  though  these  privileges  were  only 
for  the  Catholic  Church,  and  not  for  heretics  (e) ;  and  he  passed 
such  laws  as  would  make  it  possible  for  Christians  to  carry  out 
their  religious  practices,  e.  g.,  that  Christians  should  not  be 
compelled  to  sacrifice  when  the  laws  prescribed  sacrifices  (/), 
that  Sunday  be  observed  (g),  and  that  celibacy  might  be  prac- 
tised (h). 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Vila  Constantini  (PNF,  ser. 
II,  vol.  I),  II,  24-42,  46;  IV,  18-28.  Sozomen,  Hist.  Ec.  (PNF,  ser. 
II,  vol.  II),  I,  9. 

{a)  Constantine,  Ep.  ad  Ccecilianum,  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec, 
X,  6.     (MSG,  20  :  892.) 

The  probable  date  of  this  epistle  is  A.  D.  313,  though  there  is  uncer- 
tainty.    Text  in  Kirch,  nn.  323  /. 

Constantine  Augustus  to  Caecilianus,  Bishop  of  Carthage. 
Since  it  is  our  pleasure  that  something  should  be  granted  in 
all  the  provinces,  namely,  Africa  and  Numidia  and  Mauri- 
tania, to  certain  ministers  of  the  legitimate  and  most  holy 
Catholic  religion,  to  defray  their  expenses,  I  have  given  writ- 


282  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

ten  instructions  to  Ursus,  the  illustrious  finance  minister  of 
Africa,  and  have  directed  him  to  make  provision  to  pay  to  thy 
firmness  three  thousand  folles.^  Do  thou,  therefore,  when  thou 
hast  received  the  above  sum  of  money,  command  that  it  be  dis- 
tributed among  all  those  mentioned  above,  according  to  the 
brief  sent  unto  thee  by  Hosius.  But  if  thou  shouldest  find  that 
anything  is  wanting  for  the  fulfilment  of  this  my  purpose  in 
regard  to  all  of  them,  thou  shalt  demand  without  hesitation 
from  Heracleides,  our  treasurer,  whatever  thou  findest  to  be 
necessary.  For  I  commanded  him,  when  he  was  present,  that 
if  thy  firmness  should  ask  him  for  any  money,  he  should  see 
to  it  that  it  be  paid  without  any  delay.  And  since  I  have 
learned  that  some  men  of  unsettled  mind  wish  to  turn  the 
people  from  the  most  holy  and  Catholic  Church  by  a  certain 
method  of  shameful  corruption,  do  thou  know  that  I  gave 
command  to  Anuhnus,  the  proconsul,  and  also  to  Patricius, 
vicar  of  the  prefects,  when  they  were  present,  that  they 
should  give  proper  attention  not  only  to  other  matters,  but 
also,  above  all,  to  this,  and  that  they  should  not  overlook 
such  a  thing  when  it  happened.  Wherefore  if  thou  shouldest 
see  any  such  men  continuing  in  this  madness,  do  thou  with- 
out delay  go  to  the  above-mentioned  judges  and  report  the 
matter  to  them ;  that  they  may  correct  them  as  I  commanded 
them  when  they  were  present.  The  divinity  of  the  great  God 
preserve  thee  many  years. 

(b)  Constantine,  Ep.  ad  Anulinunij  in  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ec, 

X,  7.     (MSG,  20  :  893.) 

The  following  epistle,  of  the  same  year  as  the  preceding  to  Caecilianus, 
is  the  basis  of  exemptions  from  the  clergy  from  public  duties.  The  ex- 
tension of  these  exemptions  was  made  by  the  decree  of  319,  given  below. 
Text  in  Kirch,  n.  325. 

Greeting  to  thee,  our  most  esteemed  Anulinus.  Since  it 
appears  from  many  circumstances  that  when  that  religion  is 
despised  in  which  is  preserved  the  chief  reverence  for  the  most 

^  A  foUe  was  a  sum  of  money,  possibly  208  denarii. 


FAVOR  SHOWN  THE   CHURCH  283 

celestial  Power,  great  dangers  are  brought  upon  public  affairs; 
but  that  when  legally  adopted  and  observed  it  affords  most 
signal  prosperity  to  the  Roman  name  and  remarkable  fehcity 
to  all  the  affairs  of  men,  through  the  divine  beneficence,  it 
seemed  good  to  me,  most  esteemed  Anulinus,  that  those  men 
who  give  their  ser\ices  with  due  sanctity  and  with  constant 
observance  of  this  law  to  the  worship  of  the  divine  religion 
should  receive  recompense  for  their  labors.  Wherefore  it  is 
my  will  that  those  within  the  province  intrusted  to  thee,  in 
the  Catholic  Church  over  which  Caecilianus  presides,  who  give 
their  services  to  this  holy  religion,  and  who  are  commonly 
called  clergymen,  be  entirely  exempted  from  all  pubhc  duties, 
that  by  any  error  or  sacrilegious  negligence  they  may  not  be 
drawn  away  from  the  service  due  to  the  Deity,  but  may  de- 
vote themselves  without  any  hindrance  to  their  own  law. 
For  it  seems  that  when  they  show  greatest  reverence  to  the 
Deity  the  greatest  benefits  accrue  to  the  State.  Farewell,  our 
most  esteemed  and  beloved  Anulinus. 

(c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  2,  2;  A.  D.  319. 

By  the  following  law  the  exemption  of  the  clergy  from  public  bur- 
dens was  made  universal.  As  many  availed  themselves  of  the  clerical 
immunities  to  escape  their  burdens  as  curiales,  a  law  was  soon  after- 
ward passed  limiting  access  to  the  ministry  to  those  in  humbler  social 
position.     V.  supra,  58  /. 

Those  who  in  divine  worship  perform  the  services  of  relig- 
ion— that  is,  those  who  are  called  clergy — are  altogether 
exempt  from  public  obhgations,  so  that  they  may  not  be 
called  away  from  their  sacred  duties  by  the  sacrilegious 
mahce  of  certain  persons. 

{d)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  2,  4;  A.  D.  321. 

The  Church  is  hereby  permitted  to  receive  legacies.  This  was  a 
recognition  of  its  corporate  character  in  the  law,  and  indirectly  its  act 
of  incorporation. 

Every  one  has  permission  to  leave  when  he  is  dying  what- 
soever goods  he  wishes  to  the  most  holy  CathoUc  Church.  .  .  . 


284  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

{e)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  5,  i;  A.  D.  326. 

Privileges  were  granted  only  to  the  clergy  of  the  Catholic  or  great 
Church  as  distinguished  from  heretics  and  schismatics.  The  State 
was,  accordingly,  forced  by  its  exemptions  and  privileges  granted  the 
Church  to  take  up  a  position  as  to  heresy  and  schism.  See  for  Con- 
stantine's  poHcy  toward  heresy,  Eusebius,  Vita  Constantini,  III,  64 
/.  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  I.) 

Privileges  which  have  been  bestowed  in  consideration  of 
religion  ought  to  be  of  advantage  only  to  those  who  observe 
the  Cathohc  law.  It  is  our  will  that  heathen  and  schismatics 
be  not  only  without  the  privileges  but  bound  by,  and  subject 
to,  various  political  burdens. 

(/)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  2,  5;  A.  D.  323. 

This  and  the  following  laws  were  passed  to  enable  the  Christians  to 
escape  from  disadvantages  in  the  carrying  out  of  their  religion.  This 
law,  that  Christians  should  not  be  compelled  to  sacrifice,  was  enacted 
just  before  the  final  encounter  with  Licinius. 

Because  we  have  heard  that  ecclesiastics  and  others  belong- 
ing to  the  Catholic  religion  are  compelled  by  men  of  different 
religions  to  celebrate  the  sacrifices  of  the  lustrum,  we,  by  this 
decree,  do  ordain  that  if  any  one  believes  that  those  who  ob- 
serve the  most  sacred  law  ought  to  be  compelled  to  take  part 
in  the  rites  of  a  strange  superstition,  let  him,  if  his  condition 
permits,  be  beaten  with  staves,  but  if  his  rank  exempts  him 
from  such  rigor,  let  him  endure  the  condemnation  of  a  very 
heavy  fine,  which  shall  fall  to  the  State. 

(g)  Codex  Justinianus,  III,  12, 3;  A.D.  321.  Cf.  Kirch, 
n.  748. 

Sunday  is  to  be  observed. 

For  the  Justinian  Code  see  below,  §  94,  Introduction. 

All  judges  and  city  people  and  the  craftsmen  shall  rest  upon 
the  venerable  Day  of  the  Sun.  Country  people,  however,  may 
freely  attend  to  the  cultivation  of  the  fields,  because  it  fre- 
quently happens  that  no  other  days  are  better  adapted  for 


REPRESSION  OF  HEATHENISM  285 

planting  the  grain  in  the  furrows  or  the  vines  in  trenches. 
So  that  the  advantage  given  by  heavenly  providence  may  not 
for  the  occasion  of  a  short  time  perish. 

{h)  Codex  Theodosianus,  VIII,  16,  i.     Cf.  Kirch,  n.  750. 

Celibacy  was  favored  by  the  Church.  By  the  Lex  Julia  et  Papia 
Poppea  it  had  been  forbidden  under  a  fine  and  loss  of  rights  under 
wills.    Childless  marriages  also  rendered  the  parties  liable  to  disabilities. 

Those  who  are  held  as  celibates  by  the  ancient  law  are  freed 
from  the  threatened  terrors  of  the  laws,  and  let  them  so  live 
as  if  by  the  compact  of  marriage  they  were  among  the  number 
of  married  men,  and  let  all  have  an  equal  standing  as  to  taking 
what  each  one  deserves.  Neither  let  any  one  be  held  child- 
less; and  let  them  not  suffer  the  penalties  set  for  this.  The 
same  thing  we  hold  regarding  women,  and  freely  to  all  we 
loose  from  their  necks  the  commands  which  the  law  placed 
upon  them  as  a  certain  yoke.  But  there  is  no  application  of 
this  benefit  to  husbands  and  wives  as  regards  each  other, 
whose  deceitful  wiles  are  often  scarcely  restrained  by  the  ap- 
pointed rigor  of  the  law,  but  let  the  pristine  authority  of  the 
law  continue  between  such  persons. 

§  60.    The  Repression  of  Heathenism  under  Constantine 

Cons  tan  tine's  religious  policy  in  respect  to  heathenism  may 
have  been  from  the  first  to  establish  Christianity  as  the  sole 
religion  of  the  Empire  and  to  put  down  heathenism.  If  so, 
in  the  execution  of  that  policy  he  proceeded  with  great  cau- 
tion, especially  in  the  period  before  his  victory  over  Licinius. 
It  looks  at  times  as  if  for  a  while  he  aimed  at  a  parity  of  reHg- 
ions.  Certain  is  the  fact  that  only  as  conditions  became  more 
favorable  to  active  measures  of  repression  he  increased  the 
severity  of  his  laws  against  what  was  of  doubtful  legahty 
in  heathenism,  though  he  was  statesman  enough  to  recognize 
the  difference  in  the  religious  conditions  between  the  East  and 
the  West,  especially  as  to  the  hold  which  Christianity  had 
upon  the  mass  of  the  people.     While  his  measures  in  the  East 


286  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

became  constantly  harsher,  in  the  West  he  tolerated  heath- 
enism. The  commonly  received  theory  is  that  Cons  tan  tine 
changed  his  policy.  All  the  facts  can  be  as  easily  understood 
on  the  hypothesis  that  as  a  statesman  he  had  constant  regard 
to  the  advisabihty  of  drastic  execution  of  a  poHcy  which  he  in 
theory  accepted  and  would  have  carried  out  in  its  entirety 
everywhere  if  he  had  been  able. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Vita  Constantini  (PNF), 
II,  44/.,  47/.,  54/. 

(a)  Codex  Theodosianus,  IX,  16,  2;  A.  D.  319. 
Private  sacrifices  forbidden. 

Haruspices  and  priests  and  those  accustomed  to  serve  this 
rite  we  forbid  to  enter  any  private  house,  or  under  the  pre- 
tence of  friendship  to  cross  the  threshold  of  another,  under 
the  penalty  estabhshed  against  them  if  they  contemn  the 
law.^  But  those  of  you  who  regard  this  rite,  approach  the 
public  altars  and  shrines  and  celebrate  the  solemnities  of 
your  custom;  for  we  do  not  indeed  prohibit  the  duties  of 
the  old  usage  to  be  performed  in  broad  daylight. 

{h)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  10,  i;  A.  D.  320-321. 
Haruspicia  in  certain  circumstances  to  be  observed. 

If  any  part  of  our  palace  or  other  public  buildings  should 
be  struck  by  Hghtning  let  the  custom  be  retained  of  the  an- 
cient observance  as  to  what  it  signifies,  and  let  it  be  examined 
by  the  haruspices  and  very  carefully  written  down,  collected, 
and  brought  to  our  attention;  to  others  also  the  permission 
of  practising  this  custom  is  conceded,  provided  they  refrain 
from  domestic  sacrifices,  which  are  expressly  forbidden. 

{c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XV,  1,3;  A.  D.  326. 
Unfinished  heathen  temples  need  not  be  completed. 

We  direct  that  the  judges  of  the  provinces  be  warned  not  to 
give  orders  for  any  new  work  before  they  complete  the  build- 

^/.  e.,  as  to  offering  sacrifices. 


THE  DONATIST   SCHISM  287 

ings  left  incomplete  by  their  predecessors,  the  erection  of 
temples  only  being  excepted. 

§61.    The  Donatist  Schism  under  Constantine 

The  Donatist  schism  arose  in  connection  with  the  Diocle- 
tian persecution,  in  part  over  the  policy  of  Mensurius  of 
Carthage  regarding  the  fanatical  desire  for  martyrdom  and 
the  delivery  of  the  sacred  books  according  to  the  edict  of  per- 
secution. Combined  with  this  were  the  personal  ambitions 
of  the  Archdeacon  Caecihanus,  the  offended  dignity  of  the 
Primas  of  Numidia,  Bishop  Secundus  of  Tigisi,  and  the 
pique  of  a  wealthy  female  devotee,  Lucilla.  It  was  mixed  up 
with  the  customs  of  the  North  African  church,  whereby  the 
Primas  of  Numidia  exercised  a  leading  authority  in  the  con- 
duct of  the  election  of  the  bishop  of  Carthage,  and  also  with 
the  notion  prevalent  in  the  same  church,  for  which  also  Cyp- 
rian contended  in  the  controversy  on  the  baptism  of  heretics 
[see  §  52],  that  the  validity  of  a  sacrament  depended  in  some 
way  upon  the  personal  character  of  the  minister  of  that  sac- 
rament. It  was  asserted  by  the  partisans  of  Secundus,  who 
elected  Majorinus  bishop  of  Carthage,  that  FeHx  of  Aptunga, 
the  consecrator  of  CaeciUanus,  who  had  been  elected  by  the 
other  party,  had  delivered  the  sacred  books  to  the  heathen 
officials,  and  was  therefore  guilty  as  a  traditor.  A  schism, 
accordingly,  arose  in  Carthage  which  spread  rapidly  through- 
out North  Africa.  The  party  of  Majorinus  soon  came  under 
the  lead  of  Donatus  the  Great,  his  successor  in  the  schismat- 
ical  see  of  Carthage.  The  Donatist  schism  became  of  impor- 
tance almost  at  once,  and  as  it  was  inconsistent  with  Con- 
stantine's  religious  poKcy,  which  called  for  Church  unity,^  it 
presented  an  immediate  difficulty  in  the  execution  of  laws 
granting  favors  to  the  CathoHc  Church.^  On  account  of  the 
interests  involved,  the  schism  was  of  long  duration,  last- 
ing after  the  conquest  of  North  Africa  by  the  Vandals,  and 

*  V.  infra,  §  62,  Introduction.  ^  V.  supra,  §§  59/. 


288  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

even  to  the  Saracen  conquest,  though  long  since  of  no  im- 
portance. 

Anulinus,   Ep.   ad  Constantinum,   in  Augustine,   Ep.   88. 

(MSG,33:303.) 

To  Constantine  Augustus  from  AnuKnus,  a  man  of  pro- 
consular rank,  proconsul  of  Africa. 

The  welcome  and  adored  celestial  writings  sent  by  your 
Majesty  to  Caecilianus,  and  those  who  act  under  him  and  are 
called  clergy,  I  have  devoutly  taken  care  to  record  in  the 
archives  of  my  humiHty,  and  have  exhorted  those  parties 
that  when  unity  has  been  made  by  the  consent  of  all,  since 
they  are  seen  to  be  exempt  from  all  other  burdens  by  your 
Majesty's  clemency,  and  having  preserved  the  Catholic  unity, 
they  should  devote  themselves  to  their  duties  with  the  rever- 
ence due  the  sanctity  of  the  law  and  to  divine  things.  After 
a  few  days,  however,  there  arose  some,  to  whom  a  crowd  of 
people  joined  themselves,  who  thought  that  proceedings 
should  be  taken  against  Caecihanus  and  presented  me  a  sealed 
packet  wrapped  in  leather  and  a  small  document  without 
seal,  and  earnestly  requested  that  I  should  transmit  them  to 
the  sacred  and  venerable  court  of  your  divinity,  which  your 
Majesty's  most  humble  servant  has  taken  care  to  do,  Caecili- 
anus continuing  meanwhile  as  he  was.  The  acts  pertain- 
ing to  the  case  have  been  subjoined,  in  order  that  your 
Majesty  may  be  able  to  make  a  decision  concerning  the  whole 
matter.  I  have  sent  two  documents,  one  in  a  leathern  envelope 
entitled  ^'A  Document  of  the  CathoHc  Church,  the  Charges 
against  Caecihanus,  Furnished  by  the  Party  of  Majorinus"; 
the  other  attached  without  a  seal  to  the  same  leathern  enve- 
lope. Given  on  the  17th  day  before  the  calends  of  May,  in 
the  third  consulship  of  our  Lord  Constantine  Augustus  [April 
15)  3^3]' 


UNITY  OF  THE   CHURCH  289 


§  62.  Constantine's  Endeavors  to  Bring  about  the 
Unity  of  the  Church  by  Means  of  General  Synods: 
The  Councils  of  Arles  and  Nic^ea 

One  of  the  intentions  of  Constantine  in  his  support  of  Chris- 
tianity seems  to  have  been  the  employment  of  the  Christian 
religion  as  a  basis  for  imperial  unity.  The  poHcy  of  several 
earKer  emperors  in  reviving  heathenism,  and  Galerius  in  his 
persecution  of  the  Christians,  seems  likewise  to  have  been  to 
use  religion  as  a  basis  of  unity.  One  of  the  first  tasks  Con- 
stantine encountered  after  he  became  sole  ruler  of  the  West 
was  to  restore  the  unity  of  the  Church  in  Africa,  which  had 
been  endangered  by  the  disputes  culminating  in  the  Donatist 
schism;  and  when  he  became  sole  ruler  of  the  Empire  a  new 
task  of  a  similar  character  was  to  restore  unity  to  the  Church 
of  the  East,  endangered  by  the  Meletian  schism  in  Egypt  [v. 
supra,  §  57,  a],  the  Arian  controversy  in  its  first  stage  [v.  infra, 
§  63],  and  the  estrangement  of  the  Asia  Minor  churches,  due 
to  the  Easter  controversy  [v.  supra,  §  38].  It  was  a  master- 
stroke of  policy  on  the  part  of  Constantine  to  use  the  Church's 
conciliar  system  on  an  enlarged  scale  to  bring  about  this  unity. 
The  Church  was  made  to  feel  that  the  decision  was  its  own 
and  to  be  obeyed  for  religious  reasons;  at  the  same  time  the 
Emperor  was  able  to  direct  the  thought  and  action  of  the 
assembly  in  matters  of  consequence  and  to  give  to  conciliar 
action  legal  and  coercive  effect.  The  two  great  assembhes 
summoned  to  meet  the  problems  of  the  West  and  of  the  East 
were  respectively  the  Councils  of  Aries,  A.  D.  314,  and  of 
Nic£ea,  A.  D.  325. 

/.     The  Council  of  Aries  A.  D.  314 
(a)  Constantine,  Convocatio  concilii  Arelatensis,  in  Eusebius, 
Hist.  Ec,  X,  5.     (MSG,  20:888.)     Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  321/.; 
Mirbt,  nn.  89,  93-97. 

For  the  Council  of  Ades,  see  Hefele,  §§  14,  15. 


290  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

Cons  tan  tine  Augustus  to  Chrestus,  Bishop  of  Syracuse. 
When  some  began  wickedly  and  perversely  to  disagree  among 
themselves  in  regard  to  the  holy  worship  and  the  celestial 
power  and  Catholic  doctrine,  I,  wishing  to  put  an  end  to  such 
disputes  among  them,  formerly  gave  command  that  certain 
bishops  should  be  sent  from  Gaul,  and  that  the  opposing 
parties,  who  were  contending  persistently  and  incessantly  with 
each  other,  should  be  summoned  from  Africa;  that  in  their 
presence  and  in  the  presence  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  the  mat- 
ter which  appeared  to  be  causing  the  disturbance  might  be 
examined  and  decided  with  all  care.  But  since,  as  it  hap- 
pens, some,  forgetful  both  of  their  own  salvation  and  of  the 
reverence  due  to  the  most  holy  religion,  do  not  even  yet  bring 
hostilities  to  an  end,  and  are  unwilling  to  conform  to  the  judg- 
ment already  passed,  and  assert  that  those  who  expressed 
their  opinions  and  decisions  were  few,  or  that  they  had  been 
too  hasty  and  precipitate  in  giving  judgment,  before  all  the 
things  which  ought  to  have  been  accurately  investigated  had 
been  examined — on  account  of  all  this  it  has  happened  that 
those  very  ones  who  ought  to  hold  brotherly  and  harmonious 
relations  toward  each  other  are  shamefully,  or  rather  abomi- 
nably, divided  among  themselves,  arjd  give  occasion  for  rid- 
icule to  those  men  whose  souls  are  alien  as  to  this  most  holy 
religion.  Wherefore  it  has  seemed  necessary  to  me  to  pro- 
vide that  this  dissension,  which  ought  to  have  ceased  after 
the  judgment  had  been  already  given,  by  their  own  voluntary 
agreement,  should  now,  if  possible,  be  brought  to  an  end  by 
the  presence  of  many.  Since,  therefore,  we  have  commanded 
a  number  of  bishops  from  a  great  many  different  places  to 
assemble  in  the  city  of  Aries,  before  the  calends  of  August, 
we  have  thought  proper  to  write  to  thee  also  that  thou 
shouldest  secure  from  the  most  illustrious  Latronianus,  Cor- 
rector of  Sicily,  a  public  vehicle,  and  that  thou  shouldest  take 
with  thee  two  others  of  the  second  rank  whom  thou  thyself 
shalt  choose,  together  with  three  servants,  who  may  serve  you 
on  the  way,  and  betake  thyself  to  the  above-mentioned  place 
before  the  appointed  day;  that  by  thy  firmness  and  by  the 


UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  291 

wise  unanimity  and  harmony  of  the  others  present,  this  dis- 
pute, which  has  disgracefully  continued  until  the  present 
time,  in  consequence  of  certain  shameful  strifes,  after  all  has 
been  heard,  which  those  have  to  say  who  are  now  at  variance 
with  one  another,  and  whom  we  have  likewise  commanded 
to  be  present,  may  be  settled  in  accordance  with  the  proper 
faith,  and  that  brotherly  harmony,  though  it  be  but  gradual, 
may  be  restored.  May  Almighty  God  preserve  thee  in 
health  many  years. 

(b)  Synodal  Epistle  addressed  to  Sylvester,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
Bruns,  II,  107.     Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  330-337. 

The  following  extracts  give  the  canons  of  most  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  times.  The  exact  wording  of  the  canons  has  not  been 
retained  in  the  letter,  which  is  the  only  record  extant  of  the  action  of 
the  council.  The  text  from  which  the  following  is  translated  is  that 
given  by  the  monks  of  St.  Maur  in  their  CollecHo  Conciliorum  Gallics, 
reprinted  by  Hefele,  §  15,  and  Bruns,  Canones  Apostolorum  el  Con- 
ciliorum, II,  107  J".  It  is  to  be  preferred  to  the  text  of  Mansi  and  the 
older  collections. 

The  first  canon  settled  for  the  West  the  long-standing  question  as 
to  the  date  of  Easter.  The  Roman  custom  as  to  the  day  of  the  week 
and  computation  of  the  time  of  year  should  be  followed  everywhere; 
the  same  decision  was  reached  at  Nicaea  for  the  East  {v.  §  62,  //,  a). 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  computation  customary  at  Alexan- 
dria eventually  prevailed  as  the  more  accurate. 

The  eighth  and  thirteenth  canons  touch  upon  North  African  dis- 
putes. The  former  overrules  the  contention  of  Cyprian  and  his  col- 
leagues, that  heretical  or  schismatical  baptisms  were  invalid.  It  also 
laid  down  a  principle  by  which  Novatianism  stood  condemned.  The 
thirteenth  applied  a  similar  principle  to  ordination;  the  crimes  of  the 
bishop  who  gave  the  ordination  should  not  invalidate  the  ordination 
of  a  suitable  person,  as  was  claimed  in  the  case  of  the  ordination  of 
Caecilianus  by  Felix  of  Aptunga,  accused  as  a  Iraditor;  further  it  ruled 
out  the  complaints  against  Felix  until  more  substantial  proof  be 
brought,  the  official  documents  that  he  had  made  the  tradition  required 
by  the  edict  of  persecution. 

Marinus  and  the  assembly  of  bishops,  who  have  come 
together  in  the  town  of  Aries,  to  the  most  holy  lord  and  brother 
Sylvester.  What  we  have  decreed  with  general  consent  we 
signify  to  your  charity  that  all  may  know  what  ought  to  be 
observed  in  the  future. 


292  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

I.  In  the  first  place,  concerning  the  observation  of  the 
Lord's  Easter,  we  have  determined  that  it  be  observed  on  one 
day  and  at  one  time  throughout  the  world  by  us,  and  that 
you  send  letters  according  to  custom  to  all. 

8.  Concerning  the  Africans,  because  they  make  use  of 
their  own  law,  to  the  effect  that  they  rebaptize,  we  have  de- 
termined that  if  any  one  should  come  from  heresy  to  the 
Church  they  should  ask  him  the  creed;  and  if  they  should 
perceive  that  he  had  been  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  hands  only  should  be 
laid  upon  him  that  he  might  receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  That 
if  when  asked  he  should  not  reply  this  Trinity,  let  him  be 
baptized. 

9.  Concerning  those  who  bring  letters  of  the  confessors,  it 
pleased  us  that  these  letters  having  been  taken  away,  they 
should  receive  other  letters  of  communion. 

13.  Concerning  those  who  are  said  to  have  given  up  the 
Holy  Scriptures  or  the  vessels  of  the  Lord  or  the  name  of 
their  brethren,  it  has  pleased  us  whoever  of  them  shall  have 
been  convicted  by  public  documents  and  not  by  mere  words, 
should  be  removed  from  the  clerical  order;  though  if  the 
same  have  been  found  to  have  ordained  any,  and  those  whom 
they  have  ordained  are  worthy,  it  shall  not  render  their  ordi- 
nation invalid.  And  because  there  are  many  who  are  seen 
to  oppose  the  law  of  the  Church  and  think  that  they  ought 
to  be  admitted  to  bring  accusation  by  hired  witnesses,  they 
are  by  no  means  to  be  admitted,  except,  as  we  have  said 
above,  they  can  prove  their  accusations  by  public  documents. 

II.     The  Council  of  Niccea 

For  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  see  Hefele,  §§  18-44.  All  church  histories 
give  large  space  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea.     V.  infra,  §§  63  ^.,  72,  a. 

(a)  Council  of  Nicaea,  325,  Synodical  Letter,  Socrates,  Hist. 
Ec.  I,  9.  (MSG,  67  :  77.)  Text  in  Kirch,  nn.  369/.;  Mirbt, 
n.  107. 


UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  293 

To  the  holy  and,  by  the  grace  of  God,  great  Church  of  the 
Alexandrians,  and  to  our  beloved  brethren  throughout  Egypt, 
Libya,  and  PentapoHs,  the  bishops  assembled  at  Nicaea  con- 
stituting the  great  and  holy  synod,  send  greetings  in  the  Lord. 

Since  by  the  grace  of  God,  a  great  and  holy  synod  has  been 
convened  at  Nicaea,  our  most  pious  sovereign  Constantine 
having  summoned  us  out  of  various  cities  and  provinces  for 
that  purpose,  it  appeared  to  us  indispensably  necessary  that 
a  letter  should  be  written  also  to  you  on  the  part  of  the  sacred 
synod;  in  order  that  you  may  know  what  subjects  were 
brought  under  consideration,  what  rigidly  investigated,  and 
also  what  was  eventually  determined  on  and  decreed.  In 
the  first  place,  the  impiety  and  guilt  of  Arius  and  his  ad- 
herents were  examined  into,  in  the  presence  of  our  most 
pious  Emperor  Constantine :  and  it  was  unanimously  decided 
that  his  impious  opinion  be  anathematized,  with  all  the  blas- 
phemous expressions  and  terms  he  has  blasphemously  uttered, 
affirming  that  the  Son  of  God  sprang  from  nothing,  and  that 
there  was  a  time  when  He  was  not;  saying,  moreover,  that  the 
Son  of  God  was  possessed  of  a  free  will,  so  as  to  be  capable 
either  of  vice  or  virtue;  and  calHng  Him  a  creature  and  a 
work.  All  these  the  holy  synod  has  anathematized,  having 
scarcely  patience  to  endure  the  hearing  of  such  an  impious 
or,  rather,  bewildered  opinion,  and  such  abominable  blas- 
phemies. But  the  conclusion  of  our  proceedings  against  him 
you  must  either  have  heard  or  will  hear;  for  we  would  not 
seem  to  trample  on  a  man  who  has  received  the  chastisement 
which  his  crime  deserved.  Yet  so  strong  is  his  impiety  as  to 
involve  Theonas,  Bishop  of  Marmarica,  and  Secundus  of 
Ptolemais;  for  they  have  suffered  the  same  condemnation 
as  himself.  But  the  grace  of  God  freed  us  from  this  false 
doctrine,  impiety,  and  blasphemy,  and  from  those  persons  who 
have  dared  to  cause  discord  and  division  among  the  peo- 
ple previously  at  peace;  and  there  still  remained  the  con- 
tumacy of  Meletius  to  be  dealt  with,  and  those  who  had  been 
ordained  by  him;  and  we  shall  now  state  to  you,  beloved 


294  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

brethren,  what  resolution  the  synod  came  to  on  this  point. 
Acting  with  more  clemency  toward  Meletius,  although,  strictly 
speaking,  he  was  wholly  undeserving  of  favor,  the  council 
permitted  him  to  remain  in  his  own  city,  but  decreed  that  he 
should  exercise  no  authority  either  to  ordain  or  nominate  for 
ordination;  and  that  he  should  appear  in  no  other  district 
or  city  on  this  pretence,  but  simply  retain  a  nominal  dignity; 
that  those  who  had  received  appointments  from  him,  after 
having  been  confirmed  by  a  more  legitimate  ordination, 
should  be  admitted  to  communion  on  these  conditions:  that 
they  should  continue  to  hold  their  rank  and  ministry,  but 
regard  themselves  as  inferior  in  every  respect  to  all  those  who 
had  been  previously  ordained  and  established  in  each  place 
and  church  by  our  most  honored  fellow-minister  Alexander. 
In  addition  to  these  things,  they  shall  have  no  authority  to 
propose  or  nominate  whom  they  please,  or  to  do  anything  at 
all  without  the  concurrence  of  a  bishop  of  the  CathoHc 
Church,  who  is  one  of  Alexander's  suffragans.  Let  such  as 
by  the  grace  of  God  and  your  prayers  have  been  found  in  no 
schism,  but  have  continued  in  the  CathoHc  Church  blameless, 
have  authority  to  nominate  and  ordain  those  who  are  worthy 
of  the  sacred  office,  and  to  act  in  all  things  according  to  eccle- 
siastical law  and  usage.  Whenever  it  may  happen  that  any 
of  those  placed  in  the  Church  die,  then  let  such  as  have  been 
recently  admitted  into  orders  be  advanced  to  the  dignity  of 
the  deceased,  provided  that  they  appear  worthy,  and  that 
the  people  should  elect  them,  and  the  bishop  of  Alexandria 
confirm  their  choice.  This  is  conceded  to  all  the  others, 
indeed,  but  as  for  Meletius  personally  we  by  no  means  grant 
the  same,  on  account  of  his  formerly  disorderly  conduct;  and 
because  of  the  rashness  and  levity  of  his  character  he  is 
deprived  of  all  authority  and  jurisdiction,  as  a  man  liable 
again  to  create  similar  disturbances.  These  are  things  which 
specially  affect  Egypt  and  the  most  holy  Church  of  the  Alex- 
andrians; and  if  any  other  canon  or  ordinance  should  be 
established,  our  lord  and  most  honored  fellow-minister  and 


UNITY  OF  THE   CHURCH  295 

brother  Alexander  being  present  with  us,  will  on  his  return 
to  you  enter  into  more  minute  details,  inasmuch  as  he  is  not 
only  a  participator  in  whatever  is  transacted,  but  has  the 
principal  direction  of  it.  We  have  also  to  announce  the  good 
news  to  you  concerning  the  unanimity  as  to  the  holy  feast  of 
Easter:  that  this  by  your  prayers  has  been  settled  so  that  all 
the  brethren  in  the  East,  who  have  hitherto  kept  this  festival 
with  the  Jews,  will  henceforth  conform  to  the  Romans  and 
to  us,  and  to  all  who  from  the  earliest  times  have  observed  our 
period  of  celebrating  Easter.  Rejoicing,  therefore,  on  ac- 
count of  a  favorable  termination  of  matters  and  in  the  extir- 
pation of  all  heresy,  receive  with  the  greater  honor  and  more 
abundant  love  our  fellow-minister  and  your  bishop,  Alex- 
ander, who  has  greatly  deHghted  us  by  his  presence,  and 
even  at  his  advanced  age  has  undergone  extraordinary  exer- 
tions in  order  that  peace  might  be  re-estabHshed  among  you. 
Pray  on  behalf  of  us  all,  that  the  decisions  to  which  we  have 
so  justly  come  may  be  inviolably  maintained  through  Almighty 
God  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  together  with  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  whom  be  glory  forever.     Amen. 

{b)  Council  of  Nicaea,  Canon  8,  On  the  NovatianSj  Brims, 
1,8. 

The  Church  recognized  the  substantial  orthodoxy  of  the  Novatians, 
and  according  to  the  principles  laid  down  at  Aries  (cc.  8,  13,  §  62  /, 
b)  the  ordination  of  the  Novatians  was  regarded  as  valid.  The  fol- 
lowing canon,  although  a  generous  concession  on  the  part  of  the  Church, 
did  not  bring  about  a  healing  of  the  schism  which  lasted  several  cen- 
turies. The  last  mention  of  the  Novatians  is  contained  in  the  95th 
canon  of  the  second  TruUan  Council,  known  as  the  Quinisext,  A.  D.  692. 

Canon  8.  Concerning  those  who  call  themselves  Cathari, 
who  come  over  to  the  CathoHc  and  Apostolic  Church,  the 
great  and  holy  synod  decrees  that  they  who  are  ordained  shall 
continue  as  they  are  among  the  clergy.  But  before  all  things 
it  is  necessary  that  they  should  profess  in  writing  that  they 
will  observe  and  follow  the  teachings  of  the  Catholic  and 
Apostohc  Church;  that  is,  that  they  will  communicate  with 


296  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

those  who  have  been  twice  married  and  with  those  who  have 
lapsed  during  the  persecution,  and  upon  whom  a  period  of 
penance  has  been  laid  and  a  time  for  restoration  fixed;  so 
that  in  all  things  they  will  follow  the  teachings  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  Wheresoever,  then,  whether  in  villages  or  in  cities, 
only  these  are  found  who  have  been  ordained,  let  them  re- 
main as  found  among  the  clergy  and  in  the  same  rank.  But 
if  any  come  over  where  there  is  a  bishop  or  presbyter  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  it  is  manifest  that  the  bishop  of  the  Church 
must  have  the  dignity  of  a  bishop,  and  he  who  was  named 
bishop  by  those  who  are  called  Cathari  shall  have  the  honor  of 
a  presbyter,  unless  it  seem  fit  to  the  bishop  to  share  with  him 
the  honor  of  the  title.  But  if  this  should  not  seem  good  to 
him,  then  shall  the  bishop  provide  for  him  a  place  as  chore- 
piscopus,  or  as  presbyter,  in  order  that  he  may  be  evidently 
seen  to  be  of  the  clergy,  and  that  in  one  city  there  may  not 
be  two  bishops. 

(c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  5,  2;  A.  D.  326. 

With  the  generous  treatment  of  the  Novatians  by  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  should  be  compared  the  mild  and  generous  treatment  of  Con- 
stantine,  who  distinguished  them  from  other  heretics. 

We  have  not  learned  that  the  Novatians  have  been  so  con- 
demned that  we  beheve  that  to  them  should  not  be  granted 
what  they  claim.  Therefore  we  prescribe  as  to  the  buildings 
of  their  churches  and  places  suitable  for  burial  that  they  are  to 
possess,  without  any  molestation,  those  buildings  and  lands, 
namely,  which  on  ground  of  long  possession  or  from  purchase 
or  claim  for  any  sound  reason  they  may  have.  It  will  be  well 
looked  out  for  that  they  attempt  to  claim  nothing  for  them- 
selves of  those  things  which  before  their  secession  belonged 
evidently  to  the  churches  of  perpetual  sanctity. 


ARIAN   CONTROVERSY  297 

CHAPTER    II.     THE    ARIAN    CONTROVERSY    UNTIL   THE 
EXTINCTION    OF   THE    DYNASTY    OF    CONSTANTINE 

The  Arian  controversy  may  be  divided  into  four  periods 
or  stadia: 

1.  From  the  outbreak  of  the  Arian  controversy  to  the 
Council  of  Nicaea  (318-325).  In  this  stadium  the  positions 
of  the  parties  are  defined,  and  the  position  of  the  West,  in 
substantial  agreement  with  that  of  Alexander  and  Athana- 
sius,  forced  through  by  Constantine  and  Hosius  at  Nicaea 

(§63). 

2 .  From  the  Council  of  Nicaea  to  the  death  of  Constantine 
(325-337).  In  this  stadium,  without  the  setting  aside  of  the 
formula  of  Nicaea,  an  attempt  is  made  to  reconcile  those  who 
in  fact  dissented.  In  this  period  Constantine,  now  living  in 
the  East,  inclines  toward  a  position  more  in  harmony  with 
Arianism  and  more  acceptable  in  the  East  than  was  the  doc- 
trine of  Athanasius.  This  is  the  period  of  the  Eusebian 
reaction  (§64). 

3.  From  the  death  of  Constantine  to  the  death  of  Con- 
stantius  (337-361).  In  this  stadium  the  anti-Nicasan  party 
is  victorious  in  the  East  (§  65),  but  as  it  included  all  those 
who  for  any  reason  were  opposed  to  the  definition  of  Nicaea, 
it  fell  apart  on  attaining  the  annulment  of  the  decision  of 
Nicaea.  There  arose,  on  the  one  hand,  an  extreme  Arian 
party  and,  on  the  other,  a  homoiousian  party  which  approx- 
imated closely  to  the  Athanasian  position  but  feared  the 
Nicene  terminology. 

4.  From  the  accession  of  Julian  to  the  council  of  Con- 
stantinople (361-381).  Under  the  pressure  brought  against 
Christianity  by  Julian  (§  68),  parties  but  little  removed  from 
each  other  came  closer  together  (§70).  A  new  generation 
of  theologians  took  the  lead,  with  an  interpretation  of  the 
Nicene  formula  which  made  it  acceptable  to  those  who  had 
previously  regarded  it  as  Sabellian.  And  under  the  lead  of 
these  men,  backed  by  the  Emperor  Theodosius,   the  reaf- 


298  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

firmation  of  the  Nicene  formula  at  Constantinople,  381,  was 
accepted  by  the  East  (§  71). 

In  the  period  in  which  the  Arian  controversy  is  by  far  the 
most  important  series  of  events  in  Church  history,  the  atti- 
tude of  the  sons  of  Constantine  toward  heathenism  and 
Donatism  was  of  secondary  importance,  but  it  should  be 
noticed  as  throwing  light  on  the  ecclesiastical  policy  which 
made  the  Arian  controversy  so  momentous.  In  their  policy 
toward  heathenism  and  dissent,  the  policy  of  Constantine 
was  carried  to  its  logical  completion  in  the  establishment  of 
Christianity  as  the  only  lawful  religion  of  the  Empire  (§  67). 

Arianism  may  be  regarded  as  the  last  attempt  of  Dyna- 
mistic  Monarchianism  (v.  supra,  §  40)  to  explain  the  divinity 
of  Jesus  Christ  without  admitting  His  eternity.  It  was  derived 
in  part  from  the  teaching  of  Paul  of  Samosata  through  Lucian 
of  Antioch.  Paul  of  Samosata  had  admitted  the  existence 
of  an  eternal  but  impersonal  Logos  in  God  which  dwelt  in  the 
man  Jesus.  Arianism  distinguished  between  a  Logos  un- 
created, an  eternal  impersonal  reason  in  God,  and  a  personal 
Logos  created  in  time,  making  the  latter,  the  personal  Logos, 
only  in  a  secondary  sense  God.  This  latter  Logos,  neither 
eternal  nor  uncreated,  became  incarnate  in  Jesus,  taking  the 
place  in  the  human  personality  of  the  rational  soul  or  logos. 
To  guard  against  the  worship  of  a  being  created  and  temporal, 
and  to  avoid  the  assertion  of  two  eternal  existences,  the  anti- 
Arian  or  Athanasian  position,  already  formulated  by  Alex- 
ander, made  the  personal  Logos  of  one  essence  or  substance 
with  the  Father,  eternal  as  the  Father,  and  thereby  distin- 
guishing between  begetting,  or  the  imparting  of  subsistence, 
and  creating,  or  the  calling  into  being  from  nothing,  a  dis- 
tinction which  Arianism  failed  to  make;  and  thus  allowing 
for  the  eternity  and  deity  of  the  Son  without  detracting  from 
the  monotheism  which  was  universally  regarded  as  the  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  Christianity  as  a  body  of  theology.  In 
this  controversy  the  party  of  Alexander  and  Athanasius  was 
animated,  at  least  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  controversy, 


OUTBREAK  OF  ARIAN  CONTROVERSY      299 

not  so  much  by  speculative  interests  as  by  religious  motives, 
the  relation  of  Jesus  to  redemption,  and  they  were  strongly 
influenced  by  Irenaeus.  The  party  of  Arius,  on  the  other  hand, 
was  influenced  by  metaphysical  interests  as  to  the  relation 
of  being  to  creation  and  the  contrast  between  the  finite  and 
the  infinite.  It  may  be  said,  in  general,  that  until  the  coun- 
cil of  Chalcedon,  and  possibly  even  after  that,  the  main  in- 
terest that  kept  alive  theological  discussion  was  intimately 
connected  with  vital  problems  of  religious  life  of  the  times. 
After  that  the  scholastic  period  began  to  set  in  and  meta- 
physical discussions  were  based  upon  the  formulae  of  the 
councils. 

§  63.    The  Outbreak  of  the  Arian  Controversy  and 
THE  Council  of  Nic^a  A.  D.  325 

The  Arian  controversy  began  in  Alexandria  about  318,  as 
related  by  Socrates  (a).  The  positions  of  the  two  parties  were 
defined  from  the  beginning  both  by  Alexander,  bishop  of 
Constantinople  (5),  and  Arius  himself  (c),  who  by  appeaHng  to 
Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  his  fellow-student  in  the  school  of 
Lucian  of  Antioch,  enlisted  the  support  of  that  able  ecclesias- 
tical politician  and  courtier  and  at  once  extended  the  area  of 
the  controversy  throughout  the  East.  By  means  of  poems 
of  a  somewhat  popular  character  entitled  the  Thalia,  about 
322  (d),  Arius  spread  his  doctrines  still  further,  involving 
others  than  the  trained  professional  theologian.  In  the  mean- 
while Arius  and  some  other  clergy  sympathizing  with  him  in 
Egypt  were  deposed  about  320  (e).  Constantine  endeavored 
to  end  the  dispute  by  a  letter,  and,  faiHng  in  this,  sent  Hosius 
of  Cordova,  his  adviser  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  to  Alex- 
andria in  324.  On  the  advice  of  Hosius,  a  synod  was  called 
to  meet  at  Nicaea  in  the  next  year,  after  the  pattern  of  the 
earher  synod  for  the  West  at  Aries  in  314.  Here  the  basis 
for  a  definition  of  faith  was  a  non-committal  creed  presented 
by  Eusebius   of   Caesarea,  the   Church   historian  (/).     This 


300  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

was  modified,  probably  under  the  influence  of  Hosius,  so  as 
to  be  in  harmony  at  once  with  the  tenets  of  the  party  of 
Alexander  and  Athanasius,  and  with  the  characteristic  theol- 
ogy of  the  West  (g). 

Additional  source  material:  J.  Chrystal,  Authoritative  Christianity, 
Jersey  City,  1891,  vol.  I;  The  Council  of  Niccea:  The  Genuine  Remains; 
H.  R,  Percival,  The  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV) ; 
Athanasius,  On  the  Incarnation  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  IV). 

{a)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  I,  5.     (MSG,  67  :  41.) 
The  outbreak  of  the  controversy  at  Alexandria  circa  318. 

After  Peter,  who  was  bishop  of  Alexandria,  had  suffered 
martyrdom  under  Diocletian,  Achillas  succeeded  to  the  epis- 
copal ofhce,  and  after  Achillas,  Alexander  succeeded  in  the 
period  of  peace  above  referred  to.  Conducting  himself  fear- 
lessly, he  united  the  Church.  By  chance,  one  day,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  presbyters  and  the  rest  of  his  clergy,  he  was  dis- 
cussing too  ambitiously  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity, 
teaching  that  there  was  a  unity  in  the  Trinity.  But  Arius, 
one  of  the  presbyters  under  his  jurisdiction,  a  man  of  no 
inconsiderable  logical  acumen,  imagining  that  the  bishop  was 
subtly  introducing  the  doctrine  of  Sabellius  the  Libyan,  from 
the  love  of  controversy  took  the  opposite  opinion  to  that  of 
the  Libyan,  and,  as  he  thought,  vigorously  responded  to  the 
things  said  by  the  bishop.  ''If,"  said  he,  ''the  Father  begat 
the  Son,  He  that  was  begotton  had  a  beginning  of  existence; 
and  from  this  it  is  evident  that  there  was  a  time  when  the 
Son  was  not.  It  follows  necessarily  that  He  had  His  sub- 
sistence [hypostasis]  from  nothing." 

{h)  Alexander  of  Alexandria,  Ep.  ad  Alexandrum,  in  Theo- 
doret.  Hist.  Ec,  I,  3.     (MSG,  88  :  904.) 

A  statement  of  the  position  of  Alexander  made  to  Alexander,  bishop 
of  Constantinople. 

This  extract  is  to  be  found  at  the  end  of  the  letter;  it  is  evidently 
based  upon  the  creed  which  is  reproduced  with  somewhat  free  glosses. 
The  omissions  in  the  extract  are  of  the  less  important  glosses  and  proof- 


OUTBREAK  OF  ARIAN   CONTROVERSY      301 

texts.     For  the  position  of  Alexander  the  letter  of  Arius  to  Eusebius 
of  Nicomedia  given  below  (c)  should  also  be  examined. 

We  believe  as  the  Apostolic  Church  teaches,  In  one  un- 
begotten  Father,  who  of  His  being  has  no  cause,  immutable 
and  invariable,  and  who  subsists  always  in  one  state  of  being, 
admitting  neither  of  progression  nor  diminution;  who  gave  the 
law  and  the  prophets  and  the  Gospel;  of  patriarchs  and 
Apostles  and  all  saints.  Lord;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  not  out  of  that  which 
is  not,  but  of  the  Father,  who  is;  yet  not  after  the  manner  of 
material  bodies,  by  severance  or  emanation,  as  Sabellius 
and  Valentinus  taught,  but  in  an  inexpressible  and  inexplica- 
ble manner.  .  .  .  We  have  learned  that  the  Son  is  immutable 
and  unchangeable,  all-sufhcient  and  perfect,  like  the  Father, 
lacking  only  His  '^unbegottenness."  He  is  the  exact  and  pre- 
cisely similar  image  of  His  Father.  .  .  .  And  in  accordance 
with  this  we  believe  that  the  Son  always  existed  of  the  Father. 
.  .  .  Therefore  His  own  individual  dignity  must  be  reserved 
to  the  Father  as  the  Unbegotten  One,  no  one  being  called  the 
cause  of  His  existence:  to  the  Son,  likewise,  must  be  given 
the  honor  which  befits  Him,  there  being  to  Him  a  generation 
from  the  Father  which  has  no  beginning.  .  .  .  And  in  addi- 
tion to  this  pious  behef  respecting  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
we  confess  as  the  sacred  Scriptures  teach  us,  one  Holy  Spirit, 
who  moved  the  saints  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  divine 
teachers  of  that  which  is  called  the  New.  We  believe  in  one 
and  only  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  which  can  never 
be  destroyed  even  though  all  the  world  were  to  take  counsel 
to  fight  against  it,  and  which  gains  the  victory  over  all  the 
impious  attacks  of  the  heterodox.  .  .  .  After  this  we  receive 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  of  which  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord  became  the  first-fruits;  who  bore  a  body,  in  truth,  not 
in  semblance,  derived  from  Mary,  the  mother  of  God  [theo- 
tokos]  in  the  fulness  of  time  sojourning  among  the  race,  for 
the  remission  of  sins:  who  was  crucified  and  died,  yet  for  all 
this  suffered  no  diminution  of  His  Godhead.     He  rose  from 


302  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

the  dead,  was  taken  into  heaven,  and  sat  down  on  the  right 
hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high. 

(c)  Arius,  Ep.  ad  Eusebium,  in  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  1,  4. 
(MSG,  S8  :  909.) 

A  statement  in  the  words  of  Arius  of  his  own  position  and  that  of 
Alexander  addressed  to  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia. 

To  his  very  dear  lord,  the  man  of  God,  the  faithful  and 
orthodox  Eusebius,  Arius  unjustly  persecuted  by  Alexander 
the  Pope,  on  account  of  that  all-conquering  truth  of  which 
you  are  also  the  champion,  sendeth  greeting  in  the  Lord. 

.  .  .  Alexander  has  driven  us  out  of  the  city  as  atheists, 
because  we  do  not  concur  in  what  he  pubHcly  preaches; 
namely,  ^'God  is  always,  the  Son  is  always;  as  the  Father  so 
the  Son;  the  Son  coexists  unbegotten  with  God;  He  is  ever- 
lastingly begotten;  He  is  the  unbegotten  begotten;  neither 
by  thought  nor  by  any  interval  does  God  precede  the  Son; 
always  God,  always  the  Son;  the  Son  is  of  God  himself. '^ 
...  To  these  impieties  we  cannot  listen  even  though  heretics 
threaten  us  with  a  thousand  deaths.  But  we  say  and  be- 
lieve and  have  taught  and  do  teach,  that  the  Son  is  not  unbe- 
gotten, nor  in  any  way  part  of  the  Unbegotten;  nor  from  any 
substance  [hypokeimenon],^  but  that  of  His  own  will  and 
counsel  He  has  subsisted  before  time  and  before  ages,  as  per- 
fect God  only  begotten  and  unchangeable,  and  that  before 
He  was  begotten  or  created  or  purposed  or  estabhshed  He 
was  not.  For  He  was  not  unbegotten.  We  are  persecuted 
because  we  say  that  the  Son  has  a  beginning,  but  that  God 
is  without  beginning.  This  is  the  cause  of  our  persecution, 
and  likewise  because  we  say  that  He  is  of  that  which  is  not.^ 
And  this  we  say  because  He  is  neither  part  of  God,  nor  of 
any  substance  [hypokeimenon].  For  this  we  are  persecuted; 
the  rest  you  know.    I  bid  thee  farewell  in  the  Lord,  remem- 

^  &Tuoxe([xevov. 

^1^  oux  ovTtov,  the  phrase  which  was  afterward  the  foundation  of  the  Arian 
sect  of  the  Exoukontians. 


OUTBREAK  OF  ARIAN  CONTROVERSY      303 

bering  our  afflictions,  my  fellow-Lucianist  and  true  Eusebius 
[i.  e.,  pious]. 

(d)  Arius,  Thalia,  in  Athanasius,  Or  at.  contra  Arianos,  I, 
2.     (MSG,  26  :2i.) 

The  following  extracts  from  the  Thalia,  although  given  by  Atha- 
nasius,  the  opponent  of  Arius,  are  so  in  harmony  with  what  Arius  and 
his  followers  asserted  repeatedly  that  they  may  be  regarded  as  cor- 
rectly representing  the  work  from  which  they  profess  to  be  taken. 

God  was  not  always  Father;  but  there  was  when  God 
was  alone  and  was  not  yet  Father;  afterward  He  became  a 
Father.  The  Son  was  not  always;  for  since  all  things  have 
come  into  existence  from  nothing,  and  all  things  are  creatures 
and  have  been  made,  so  also  the  Logos  of  God  himself  came 
into  existence  from  nothing  and  there  was  a  time  when  He  was 
not;  and  that  before  He  came  into  existence  He  was  not; 
but  He  also  had  a  beginning  of  His  being  created.  For  God, 
he  says,  was  alone  and  not  yet  was  there  the  Logos  and  Wis- 
dom. Afterward  He  willed  to  create  us,  then  He  made  a 
certain  one  and  named  Him  Logos  and  Wisdom  and  Son,  in 
order  that  by  Him  He  might  create  us.  He  says,  therefore, 
that  there  are  two  wisdoms,  one  proper  to,  and  existing  together 
with,  God;  but  the  Son  came  into  existence  by  that  wisdom, 
and  was  made  a  partaker  of  it  and  was  only  named  Wisdom 
and  Logos.  For  Wisdom  existed  by  wisdom  and  the  will  of 
God's  wisdom.  So,  he  says,  that  there  is  another  Logos 
besides  the  Son  in  God,  and  the  Son  partaking  of  that  Logos 
is  again  named  Logos  and  Son  by  grace.  .  .  .  There  are  many 
powers;  and  there  is  one  which  is  by  nature  proper  to  God 
and  eternal;  but  Christ,  again,  is  not  the  true  power  of  God, 
but  is  one  of  those  which  are  called  powers,  of  whom  also  the 
locust  and  the  caterpillar  are  called  not  only  a  power  but  a 
great  power  [Joel  2:2],  and  there  are  many  other  things  like  to 
the  Son,  concerning  whom  David  says  in  the  Psalms:  "The 
Lord  of  Powers";^   likewise  the  Logos  is  mutable,  as  are  all 

1  Psalm  24  :  lo;  Hebrew,  The  Lord  of  Hosts  ;  LXX,  The  Lord  of  Powers. 


304  THE   IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

things,  and  by  His  own  free  choice,  so  far  as  He  wills,  remains 
good;  because  when  He  wills  He  is  able  to  change,  as  also 
we  are,  since  His  nature  is  subject  to  change.  Then,  says 
he,  God  foreseeing  that  He  would  be  good,  gave  by  antici- 
pation to  Him  that  glory,  which  as  a  man  He  afterward  had 
from  His  virtue;  so  that  on  account  of  His  works,  which  God 
foresaw,  God  made  Him  to  become  such  as  He  is  now. 

(e)  Council  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  320,  Epistula  encyclica, 
in  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  I,  6.     (MSG,  67  :  45.)     Cf.  Kirch,  nn. 

353/- 

The  encyclical  of  the  Council  of  Alexandria  under  Alexander,  in 
which  Arius  and  his  sympathizers  were  deposed,  was  possibly  composed 
by  Athanasius.  It  is  commonly  found  in  his  works,  entitled  Depositio 
Arii.  It  is  also  found  in  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Socrates.  For 
council,  see  Hefele,  §  20. 

Those  who  became  apostates  were  Arius,  Achillas,  i^ithales, 
Carpones,  another  Arius,  and  Sarmates,  who  were  then  pres- 
byters; Euzoius,  Lucius,  Julianus,  Menas,  Helladius,  and 
Gains,  who  were  then  deacons;  and  with  them  Secundus  and 
Theonas,  then  called  bishops.  And  the  novelties  which  they 
have  invented  and  put  forth  contrary  to  the  Scriptures  are 
the  following:  God  was  not  always  a  Father,  but  there  was  a 
time  when  He  was  not  a  Father.  The  Logos  of  God  was  not 
always,  but  came  into  existence  from  things  that  were  not; 
wherefore  there  was  a  time  when  He  was  not;  for  the  Son 
is  a  creature  and  a  work.  Neither  is  He  like  in  essence  to 
the  Father.  Neither  is  He  truly  by  nature  the  Logos  of  the 
Father;  neither  is  He  His  true  Wisdom;  but  He  is  one  of  the 
things  made  and  created,  and  is  called  the  Logos  and  Wisdom 
by  an  abuse  of  terms,  since  He  himself  originated  by  God's 
own  logos  and  by  the  wisdom  that  is  in  God,  by  which  God 
has  made  not  only  all  things  but  Him  also.  Wherefore  He  is 
in  His  nature  subject  to  change  and  variation  as  are  all  rational 
creatures.  And  the  Logos  is  foreign,  is  alien  and  separated 
from  the  being  [ousia]  of  God.     And  the  Father  cannot  be^ 

*  Some  texts  insert  "  seen  nor." 


OUTBREAK  OF  ARIAN   CONTROVERSY      305 

described  by  the  Son,  for  the  Logos  does  not  know  the  Father 
perfectly  and  accurately,  neither  can  He  see  Him  perfectly. 
Moreover,  the  Son  knows  not  His  own  essence  as  it  really  is; 
for  He  was  made  on  account  of  us,  that  God  might  create  us 
by  Him  as  by  an  instrument;  and  He  would  not  have  existed 
had  not  God  willed  to  create  us.  Accordingly  some  one  asked 
them  whether  the  Logos  of  God  is  able  to  change  as  the 
devil  changed,  and  they  were  not  afraid  to  say  that  He  can 
change;  for  being  something  made  and  created,  His  nature 
is  subject  to  change. 

(/")  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  Creed,  in  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec.y  I, 
8.     (MSG,  67  :  69.)     Cf.  Hahn,  §  188. 

This  creed  was  presented  at  the  Council  of  Nicaea  by  the  historian 
Eusebius,  who  took  the  lead  of  the  middle  party  at  the  council.  He 
stated  that  it  had  long  been  in  use  in  his  church. 

We  beheve  in  one  God,  Father  Almighty,  the  maker  of 
all  things  visible  and  invisible;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Logos  of  God,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  Life  of  Life, 
only  begotten  Son,  the  first-born  of  all  creation,  begotten  of 
His  Father  before  all  ages,  by  whom,  also,  all  things  were  made, 
who  for  our  salvation  became  flesh,  who  Hved  among  men, 
and  suffered  and  rose  again  on  the  third  day,  and  ascended  to 
the  Father,  and  will  come  again  in  glory  to  judge  the  living 
and  the  dead.  We  believe  also  in  one  Holy  Spirit.  We  be- 
lieve that  each  of  these  [i.  e.,  three]  is  and  subsists;^  the  Father 
truly  Father,  the  Son  truly  Son;  the  Holy  Spirit  truly  Holy 
Spirit;  as  our  Lord  also  said,  when  He  sent  His  disciples  to 
preach:  ''Go  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit"  [Matt. 
28:19]. 

{g)  Cotmcil  of  Nicaea  A.  D.  325,  Creed,  in  Socrates,  Hist. 
Ec,  I,  8.     (MSG,  67  :  68.)     Cf.  Hahn,  §  142. 

The  creed  of  Nicaea  is  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  what  is 
commonly  called  the  Nicene  creed.     The  actual  creed  put  forth  at  the 


3o6  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

council  is  as  follows.  The  discussion  by  Loofs,  Dogmengeschickie,  §  32, 
is  brief  but  especially  important,  as  he  shows  that  the  creed  was  drawn 
up  under  the  influence  of  the  Western  formulae. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  Father  Almighty,  maker  of  all  things 
visible  and  invisible;  and  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,  begotten  of  His  Father,  only  begotten,  that  is  of  the 
ousia  of  the  Father,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  true  God  of 
true  God;  begotten,  not  made,  of  one  substance^  with  the 
Father,  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  both  things  in  heaven 
and  things  in  earth,  who  for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation, 
came  down  from  heaven  and  was  made  [became]  flesh  and 
was  made  [became]  man,  suffered  and  rose  again  on  the  third 
day,  ascended  into  the  heavens  and  comes  to  judge  Hving 
and  dead. 

But  those  who  say  there  was  when  He  was  not,  and  before 
being  begotten  He  was  not,  and  He  was  made  out  of  things 
that  were  not^  or  those  who  say  that  the  Son  of  God  was  from 
a  different  substance  [hypostasis]  or  being  [ousia]  or  a  crea- 
ture, or  capable  of  change  or  alteration,  these  the  CathoHc 
Church  anathematizes. 

§  64.    The  Beginnings  of  the  Eusebian  Reaction  under 
constantine 

Shortly  after  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  Constantine  seems  to 
have  become  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  decision  at  that  coun- 
cil was  not  acceptable  in  the  East  as  a  whole,  representing,  as 
it  did,  what  was  generally  felt  to  be  an  extreme  position.  In 
coming  to  this  opinion  he  was  much  influenced  by  Eusebius 
of  Nicomedia  who,  by  powerful  court  interest,  was  soon  re- 
called from  exile  and  even  became  the  leading  ecclesiastical 
adviser  of  Constantine.  The  policy  of  this  bishop  was  to 
prepare  the  way  for  the  revocation  of  the  decree  of  Nicaea  by 
a  preliminary  rehabihtation  of  Arius  (a),  and  by  attacking  the 
leaders  of  the  opposite  party  (b).  Constantine,  however, 
never  consented  to  the  abrogation  of  the  creed  of  Nicaea. 

^  Homoousios.  ^  i^  6ux  ovtqv. 


THE  EUSEBIAN  REACTION  307 

Additional  source  material:  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  1,  8  (letter  of  Euse- 
bius  to  his  diocese),  14,  28  ff.  Eusebius,  Vita  Constantini,  III,  23; 
Athanasius,  Eistoria  Arianomm,  §§  4-7. 

(a)  Arius,  Confession  of  Faith,  in  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec.,1,  26. 
(MSG,  67  :  I49-) 

As  a  part  of  the  process  whereby  Arius  should  be  rehabilitated  by- 
being  received  back  into  the  Church  he  was  invited  by  Constantine 
to  appear  at  the  court.  He  was  there  presented  to  the  Emperor  and 
produced  a  confession  of  faith  purposely  vague  and  general  in  state- 
ment, but  intended  to  give  the  impression  that  he  held  the  essentials 
of  the  received  orthodoxy.     The  text  is  that  given  by  Hahn,  §  187. 

Arius  and  Euzoius  to  our  most  religious  and  pious  Lord, 
the  Emperor  Constantine. 

In  accordance  with  the  command  of  your  devout  piety, 
sovereign  lord,  we  declare  our  faith,  and  before  God  we  pro- 
fess in  writing  that  we  and  our  adherents  believe  as  follows : 

We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty;  and  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  His  Son,  who  was  made  by  Him  before  all 
ages,  God  the  Word,  through  whom  all  things  were  made, 
both  those  which  are  in  heaven  and  those  upon  earth;  who 
descended,  and  became  incarnate,  and  suffered,  and  rose 
again,  ascended  into  the  heavens,  and  will  again  come  to 
judge  the  living  and  the  dead.  Also  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
in  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  and  in  the  hfe  of  the  coming 
age,  and  in  the  kingdom  of  the  heavens,  and  in  one  Catholic 
Church  of  God,  extending  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the 
other. 

This  faith  we  have  received  from  the  holy  gospels,  the  Lord 
therein  saying  to  His  disciples:  ''Go  teach  all  nations,  baptiz- 
ing them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Spirit."  If  we  do  not  so  beHeve  and  truly  receive 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  whole  CathoHc  Church 
and  the  Holy  Scriptures  teach  (in  which  we  beHeve  in  every 
respect)  God  is  our  judge  both  now  and  in  the  coming  judg- 
ment. Wherefore  we  beseech  your  piety,  most  devout  Em- 
peror, that  we  who  are  persons  consecrated  to  the  ministry, 


3o8  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

and  holding  the  faith  and  sentiments  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  may  by  your  pacific  and  devoted  piety  be 
reunited  to  our  mother,  the  Church,  all  superfluous  questions 
and  disputings  being  avoided;  that  so  both  we  and  the  whole 
Church  may  be  at  peace  and  in  common  offer  our  accustomed 
prayers  for  your  tranquil  reign  and  on  behalf  of  your  whole 
family. 

(b)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  I,  23.     (MSG,  67  :  140.) 
The  attack  of  the  Arians  upon  Athanasius  and  his  party. 

The  partisans  of  Eusebius  and  Theognis  having  returned 
from  their  exile,  they  received  again  their  churches,  having 
expelled,  as  we  observed,  those  who  had  been  ordained  in 
their  stead.  Moreover  they  came  into  great  consideration 
with  the  Emperor,  who  honored  them  exceedingly,  as  those 
who  had  returned  from  error  to  the  orthodox  faith.  They, 
however,  abused  the  license  granted  them  by  exciting  com- 
motions in  the  world  greater  than  before;  being  instigated 
to  this  by  two  causes — on  the  one  hand,  the  Arian  heresy 
with  which  they  had  been  previously  infected,  and  on  the 
other  hand,  by  animosity  against  Athanasius  because  in  the 
synod  he  had  so  vigorously  withstood  them  in  the  discussion 
of  the  articles  of  the  faith.  And  in  the  first  place  they  objected 
to  the  ordination  of  Athanasius,  not  only  as  of  one  unworthy 
of  the  episcopate,  but  also  as  of  one  not  elected  by  quahfied 
persons.  But  when  he  had  shown  himself  superior  to  this 
calumny  (for  having  assumed  direction  of  the  Church  of  the 
Alexandrians,  he  ardently  contended  for  the  Nicene  creed), 
then  the  adherents  of  Eusebius  exerted  themselves  to  cause 
the  removal  of  Athanasius  and  to  bring  Arius  back  to  Alex- 
andria; for  thus  only  did  they  think  they  should  be  able  to 
cast  out  the  doctrine  of  consubstantiality  and  introduce 
Arianism.  Eusebius  therefore  wrote  to  Athanasius  to  receive 
Arius  and  his  adherents;  and  when  he  wrote  he  not  only  en- 
treated him,  but  he  openly  threatened  him.  When  Athanasius 
would  by  no  means  accede  to  this  he  endeavored  to  persuade 


THE  EUSEBIAN  REACTION  309 

the  Emperor  to  receive  Arius  in  audience  and  then  permit 
him  to  return  to  Alexandria;  and  how  he  accomplished  these 
things  I  shall  tell  in  its  proper  place. 

Meanwhile,  before  this,  another  commotion  was  raised  in 
the  Church.  In  fact  those  of  the  household  of  the  Church 
again  disturbed  her  peace.  Eusebius  Pamphilius  says  that 
immediately  after  the  synod  Egypt  became  agitated  by  in- 
testine divisions;  but  he  does  not  give  the  reason  for  this. 
From  this  he  has  gained  the  reputation  of  being  disingenuous 
and  of  avoiding  the  specification  of  the  causes  of  these  dissen- 
sions from  a  determination  on  his  part  not  to  give  his  sanc- 
tion to  the  proceedings  at  Nicsea.  Yet  as  we  ourselves  have 
discovered  from  various  letters  which  the  bishops  wrote  to 
one  another  after  the  synod,  the  term  homoousios  troubled 
some  of  them.  So  that  while  they  occupied  themselves  about 
it,  investigating  it  very  minutely,  they  roused  the  strife  against 
each  other.  It  seemed  not  unlike  a  contest  in  the  dark;  for 
neither  party  appeared  to  understand  distinctly  the  grounds 
on  which  they  calumniated  one  another.  Those  who  objected 
to  the  word  homoousios  conceived  that  those  who  approved 
it  favored  the  opinion  of  SabelHus  and  Montanus;  they  there- 
fore called  them  blasphemers,  as  subverting  the  existence  of 
the  Son  of  God.  And  again  those  who  defended  the  term, 
charging  their  opponents  with  polytheism,  inveighed  against 
them  as  introducers  of  heathen  superstitions.  Eustathius, 
bishop  of  Antioch,  accuses  Eusebius  Pamphilius  of  pervert- 
ing the  Nicene  creed;  Eusebius  again  denies  that  he  violates 
that  exposition  of  the  faith,  and  accuses  Eustathius  of  in- 
troducing the  opinion  of  Sabellius.  Therefore  each  of  them 
wrote  as  if  contending  against  adversaries;  but  both  sides 
admitted  that  the  Son  of  God  has  a  distinct  person  and  ex- 
istence, confessing  that  there  is  one  God  in  three  persons 
(hypostases)  yet  they  were  unable  to  agree,  for  what  cause  I 
do  not  know,  and  could  in  no  way  be  at  peace. 


3IO  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 


§65.    The   Victory  of  the  Anti-Nicene  Party  in  the 

East 

When  Constantine  died  in  337  the  party  of  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia  was  completely  in  the  ascendant  in  the  East.  A 
council  at  Antioch,  339,  deposed  Athanasius,  and  he  was 
expelled  from  Alexandria,  and  Gregory  of  Cappadocia  was 
consecrated  in  his  place.  Athanasius,  with  Marcellus  of 
Ancyra  and  other  supporters  of  the  Nicene  faith,  repaired  to 
Rome  where  they  were  supported  by  JuHus,  bishop  of  Rome, 
at  a  well-attended  local  council  in  340  (a,  b).  In  the  East 
numerous  attempts  were  made  to  formulate  a  confession  of 
faith  which  might  take  the  place  of  the  Nicene  creed  and  prove 
acceptable  to  all  parties.  The  most  important  of  these  were 
produced  at  the  Council  of  Antioch,  341,  at  which  no  less  than 
four  creeds  were  formulated  (c,  d). 

Additional  source  material:  Percival,  The  Seven  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV) ;  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec.  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol. 
II),  II,  19  (Formula  Macrostichos) ;  Athanasius,  De  Synodis  (PNF,  ser. 
II,  vol.  IV). 

(a)  Athanasius,    Apologia    contra    Arianos,     20.     (MSG, 

25  :  280.) 

Athanasius  and  his  allies  in  exile  in  the  West  are  exonerated  at  Rome. 

The  Eusebians  wrote  also  to  Julius,  thinking  to  frighten 
me,  requesting  him  to  call  a  council,  and  Julius  himself  to  be 
the  judge  if  he  pleased.  When,  therefore,  I  went  up  to  Rome, 
JuKus  wrote  to  the  Eusebians,  as  was  suitable,  and  sent  more- 
over two  of  his  presbyters,  Elpidius  and  Philoxenus.  But 
when  they  heard  of  me  they  became  confused,  because  they 
did  not  expect  that  we  would  come  up;  and  they  decUned, 
alleging  absurd  reasons  for  so  doing,  but  in  truth  fearing  lest 
the  things  should  be  proved  against  them  which  Valens  and 
Ursacius  afterward  confessed.  However,  more  than  fifty 
bishops  assembled  in  the  place  where  the  presbyter  Vito  held 


VICTORY  OF  THE  ANTI-NICENE   PARTY    311 

his  congregation,  and  they  acknowledged  my  defence  and 
gave  me  the  confirmation  both  of  their  communion  and  their 
love.  On  the  other  hand,  they  expressed  great  indignation 
against  the  Eusebians  and  requested  that  JuHus  write  to  the 
following  effect  to  them  who  had  written  to  him.  And  he 
wrote  and  sent  it  by  Count  Gabienus. 

(b)  JuHus  of  Rome,  Epistula,  in  Athanasius,  Apologia  contra 
Arianos,  §§  26^.     (MSG,  25  :  292.) 

Julius  to  his  dearly  beloved  brethren,  Danius,  Flacillus, 
Narcissus,  Eusebius,  and  Alatis,  Macedonius,  Theodorus,  and 
their  friends,  who  have  written  him  from  Antioch,  sends 
health  in  the  Lord. 

§  26.  .  .  .  It  is  necessary  for  me  to  inform  you  that  al- 
though I  alone  wrote,  yet  it  was  not  my  opinion  only,  but  of 
all  the  bishops  throughout  Italy  and  in  these  parts.  I,  indeed, 
was  unwilhng  to  cause  them  all  to  write,  lest  they  might  have 
weight  by  mere  numbers.  The  bishops,  however,  assembled 
on  the  appointed  day,  and  agreed  in  these  opinions,  which  I 
again  write  to  signify  to  you;  so  that,  dearly  beloved,  al- 
though I  alone  address  you,  yet  you  may  know  it  is  the  opin- 
ion of  all.  .  .  . 

§  27.  That  we  have  not  admitted  to  our  communion  our 
fellow-bishops  Athanasius  and  Marcellus  either  hastily  or  un- 
justly, although  sufficiently  shown  above,  it  is  but  fair  to 
set  briefly  before  you.  The  Eusebians  first  wrote  against 
Athanasius  and  his  fellows,  and  you  have  also  written  now; 
but  many  bishops  out  of  Egypt  and  other  provinces  wrote  in 
his  favor.  Now  in  the  first  place,  your  letters  against  him 
contradict  each  other,  and  the  second  have  no  sort  of  agree- 
ment with  the  first,  but  in  many  instances  the  former  are 
refuted  by  the  latter,  and  the  latter  are  impeached  by  the 
former.  .  .  . 

§  29.  Now  when  these  things  were  thus  represented,  and 
so  many  witnesses  appeared  in  his  behalf,  and  so  much  ad- 
vanced by  him  in  his  own  justification,  what  did  it  become 


312  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

us  to  do?  Or  what  did  the  rule  of  the  Church  require  except 
that  we  should  not  condemn  the  man,  but  rather  receive  him 
and  hold  him  as  a  bishop  as  we  have  done.  .  .  . 

§  32.  With  respect  to  Marcellus,  forasmuch  as  you  have 
written  concerning  him  also  as  impious  in  respect  to  Christ, 
I  am  anxious  to  inform  you  that,  when  he  was  here,  he  pos- 
itively declared  that  what  you  had  written  concerning  him 
was  not  true;  but,  being  nevertheless  requested  by  us  to  give 
an  account  of  his  faith,  he  answered  in  his  own  person  with 
the  utmost  boldness,  so  that  we  recognize  that  he  maintains 
nothing  outside  of  the  truth.  He  confessed  that  he  piously 
held  the  same  doctrine  concerning  our  Lord  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ  as  the  Catholic  Church  holds;  and  he  affirmed 
that  he  had  held  these  opinions  not  merely  now  but  for  a  very 
long  time  since;  as  indeed  our  presbyters,  who  were  at  a 
former  time  at  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  testified  to  his  ortho- 
doxy, for  he  maintained  both  then  and  now  his  opposition  to 
the  heresy  of  Arius;  on  which  point  it  is  right  to  admonish 
you,  that  none  of  you  admit  such  heresy,  but  instead  abom- 
inate it  as  alien  from  the  wholesome  doctrine.  Since  he  pro- 
fessed orthodox  opinions  and  offered  testimony  to  his  ortho- 
doxy, what  again  ought  we  in  his  case  to  have  done  except 
to  treat  him  as  a  bishop,  as  we  did,  and  not  reject  him  from 
our  communion?  .  .  . 

§  33.  For  not  only  the  bishops  Athanasius  and  Marcellus 
and  their  fellows  came  here  and  complained  of  the  injustice 
that  had  been  done  them,  but  many  other  bishops,  also,  from 
Thrace,  from  Ccele-Syria,  from  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine;  and 
presbyters,  not  a  few,  and  others  from  Alexandria  and  from 
other  parts  were  present  at  the  council  here  and,  in  addition 
to  their  own  statements,  lamented  bitterly  before  all  the 
assembled  bishops  the  violence  and  injustice  which  the 
churches  had  suffered;  and  they  affirmed  that  outrages  sim- 
ilar to  those  which  had  been  committed  in  Alexandria  had 
occurred  not  in  word  only  but  in  deed  in  their  own  churches 
and  in  others  also. 


VICTORY  OF  THE  ANTI-NICENE  PARTY    313 

(c)  Second  Creed  of  Antioch,  A.  D.  341,  in  Athanasius,  De 
Synodis  Arimini  et  Seleucice,  ch.  23.  (MSG,  26:721.)  Also 
in  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  10.  (MSG,  67  :  201.)  Cf.  Hahn, 
§  154- 

The  Council  of  Antioch  in  341  was  gathered  ostensibly  to  dedicate 
the  great  church  of  that  city,  in  reality  to  act  against  the  Nicene  party. 
It  was  attended  by  ninety  or  more  bishops  of  whom  thirty-six  were 
Arians.  The  others  seem  to  have  been  chiefly  members  of  the  middle 
party.  The  dogmatic  definitions  of  this  council  have  never  been 
accepted  by  the  Church;  on  the  other  hand,  the  canons  on  discipline 
have  always  enjoyed  a  very  high  place  in  the  esteem  of  later  genera- 
tions. The  following  creed,  the  second  of  the  Antiochian  creeds,  is 
traditionally  regarded  as  having  been  composed  originally  by  Lucian 
of  Antioch,  the  master  of  Arius.  Hence  it  is  known  as  the  creed  of 
Lucian. 

We  believe  in  accordance  with  evangelic  and  apostolic 
tradition  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty,  the  creator,  the 
maker  and  provider  of  all  things.  And  in  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  His  only  begotten  Son,  God,  through  whom  are  all 
things,  who  was  begotten  of  His  Father  before  all  ages,  God 
of  God,  whole  of  whole,  only  one  of  only  one,  perfect  of  per- 
fect, king  of  king,  lord  of  lord,  the  living  word,  living  wisdom, 
true  hght,  way,  truth,  resurrection,  shepherd,  door,  unchange- 
able, unalterable,  and  immutable,  the  unchangeable  likeness  of 
the  Godhead,  both  of  the  substance,  and  will  and  power  and 
glory  of  the  Father,  the  first-born  of  all  creation,  who  was  in 
the  beginning  with  God,  God  Logos,  according  to  what  is  said 
in  the  Gospel:  ''and  the  word  was  God,"  through  whom  all 
things  were  made,  and  ''in  whom  all  things  consist,"  who  in 
the  last  days  came  down  from  above,  and  was  born  of  a  vir- 
gin, according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  became  man,  the  media- 
tor between  God  and  man,  and  the  apostle  of  our  faith,  and 
the  prince  of  life;  as  He  says,  "I  have  come  down  from 
heaven,  not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  Him  that 
sent  me";  who  suffered  for  us,  and  rose  the  third  day  and 
ascended  into  heaven  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father,  and  comes  again  with  glory  and  power  to  judge  the 


314  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

living  and  the  dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit  given  for  con- 
solation and  sanctification  and  perfection  to  those  who  be- 
lieve; as  also  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  commanded  his  disciples, 
saying,  "Go  ye,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name 
of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  clearly 
of  the  Father  who  is  really  a  Father,  and  of  the  Son  who  is 
really  a  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  who  is  really  a  Holy 
Spirit;  these  names  being  assigned  not  vaguely  nor  idly,  but 
indicating  accurately  the  special  subsistence  [hypostasis], 
order,  glory  of  those  named,  so  that  in  subsistence  they  are 
three,  but  in  harmony  one. 

Having  then  this  faith  from  the  beginning  and  holding  it 
to  the  end,  before  God  and  Christ  we  anathematize  all  heret- 
ical false  doctrines.  And  if  any  one  contrary  to  the  right 
faith  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  teaches  and  says  that  there  has 
been  a  time,  a  season,  or  age,  or  being  or  becoming,  before 
the  Son  of  God  was  begotten,  let  him  be  accursed.  And  if 
any  one  says  that  the  Son  is  a  creature  as  one  of  the  creatures, 
or  generated  as  one  of  the  things  generated,  or  made  as  one 
of  the  things  made,  and  not  as  the  divine  Scriptures  have 
handed  down  each  of  the  forenamed  statements;  or  if  a  man 
teaches  or  preaches  anything  else  contrary  to  what  we  have 
received,  let  him  be  accursed.  For  we  truly  and  clearly  both 
beheve  and  follow  all  things  from  the  Holy  Scriptures  that 
have  been  transmitted  to  us  by  the  prophets  and  Apostles. 

(d)  Fourth  Creed  of  Antioch,  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  i8. 
(MSG,  67  :  221.)     Cf.  Hahn,  §  156. 

This  creed  is  an  approximation  to  the  Nicene  creed  but  without  the 
use  of  the  word  of  especial  importance,  homoousios.  Valuable  critical 
notes  on  the  text  of  this  and  the  preceding  creed  are  to  be  found  in 
Hahn;  as  these  creeds  are  to  be  found  both  in  the  work  of  Athanasius 
on  the  councils  of  synods  of  Ariminum  and  Seleucia.  in  the  ecclesiastical 
history  of  Socrates  and  elsewhere,  there  is  a  variety  of  readings,  but 
of  minor  significance  so  far  as  the  essential  features  are  concerned. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  Father  Almighty,  the  creator  and 
maker  of  all  things,  of  whom  the  whole  family  in  heaven  and 


COLLAPSE  OF  ANTI-NICENE  PARTY        315 

upon  earth  is  named ;  and  in  his  only  begotten  Son,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  was  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all  ages; 
God  of  God,  light  of  light,  through  whom  all  things  in  the 
heavens  and  upon  earth,  both  \asible  and  invisible  were 
made:  who  is  the  word,  and  wisdom,  and  power,  and  hfe, 
and  true  light:  who  in  the  last  days  for  our  sake  was  made 
[became]  man,  and  was  born  of  the  holy  Virgin;  was  crucified, 
and  died;  was  buried,  arose  again  from  the  dead  on  the  third 
day,  and  ascended  into  heaven,  is  seated  at  the  right  hand 
of  the  Father,  and  is  coming  at  the  consummation  of  the  age 
to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead,  and  to  render  to  each  accord- 
ing to  his  works:  whose  kingdom,  being  perpetual,  shall  con- 
tinue to  infinite  ages  (for  He  shall  sit  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father,  not  only  in  this  age,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to  come). 
And  in  the  Holy  Spirit;  that  is,  in  the  comforter,  whom  the 
Lord,  according  to  His  promise,  sent  to  His  Apostles  after 
His  ascension  into  the  heavens,  to  teach  and  bring  all  things 
to  their  remembrance :  by  whom,  also,  the  souls  of  those  who 
have  sincerely  believed  in  Him  shall  be  sanctified;  and  those 
who  assert  that  the  Son  was  made  of  things  which  are  not, 
or  of  another  subsistence  [h}^ostasis],  and  not  of  God,  or  that 
there  was  a  time  or  age  when  He  did  not  exist  the  holy  Cath- 
olic Church  accounts  as  aliens. 

§  66.  Collapse  of  the  Anti-Nicene  Middle  Party; 
THE  Renewal  of  Arl\nism;  the  Rise  of  the  Ho- 
MOOUsiAN  Party 

When  Constantius  became  sole  Emperor,  on  the  death  of 
his  brother  Cons  tans  in  350,  there  was  no  further  need  of 
considering  the  interests  of  the  Nicene  party.  Only  the 
necessity  of  estabHshing  his  authority  in  the  West  against 
usurpers  engaged  his  attention  until  356,  when  a  series  of 
councils  began,  designed  to  put  an  end  to  the  Nicene  faith. 
Of  the  numerous  confessions  of  faith  put  forth,  the  second 
creed  of  Sirmium  of  357  is  important  as  attempting  to  abol- 


3i6  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

ish  in  connection  with  the  discussion  the  use  of  the  term  ousia 
and  likewise  homoousios  and  homoiousios  (a).  At  Nice  in 
Thrace  a  still  greater  departure  from  Nicaea  was  attempted 
in  359,  and  a  creed  was  put  forth  (b),  which  is  of  special  sig- 
nificance as  containing  the  first  reference  in  a  creed  to  the 
desensus  ad  inferos  and  to  the  fact  that  it  was  subscribed  by 
the  deputies  of  the  West  including  Bishop  Liberius  of  Rome. 
For  the  discussion  of  this  act  of  Liberius,  see  J.  Barmby,  art. 
"Liberius"  in  DCB;  see  also  Catholic  Encydopcedia,  art. 
"Liberius."  It  was  also  received  in  the  synod  of  Seleucia  in 
the  East.  On  these  councils  see  Athanasius,  De  Synodis 
(PNF).  It  was  in  reference  to  this  acceptance  of  the  creed 
of  Nice  that  Jerome  wrote  "The  whole  world  groaned  and 
was  astonished  that  it  was  Arian."  See  Jerome,  Contra 
Luciferianos,  §§  i8 /.  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  VI). 

Inasmuch  as  the  anti-Nicene  opposition  party  was  a  coali- 
tion of  all  parties  opposed  to  the  wording  of  the  Nicene  creed, 
as  soon  as  that  creed  was  aboUshed  the  bond  that  held  them 
together  was  broken.  At  once  there  arose  an  extreme  Arian- 
ism  which  had  remained  in  the  background.  On  the  other 
hand,  those  who  were  opposed  to  Arianism  sought  to  draw 
nearer  the  Nicene  party.  These  were  the  Homoiousians,  who 
objected  to  the  term  homoousios  as  savoring  of  Sabellianism, 
and  yet  admitted  the  essential  point  implied  by  it.  That  this 
was  so  was  pointed  out  by  Hilary  of  Poitiers  (c)  who  con- 
tended that  what  the  West  meant  by  homoousios  the  East 
meant  by  homoiousios.  The  Homoiousian  party  of  the  East 
spHt  on  the  question  of  the  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Those  of 
them  who  denied  the  deity  of  the  Spirit  remained  Semi-Arians. 

(a)  Second  Creed  of  Sirmium,  in  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  De 
Synodis,  ch.  ii.     (MSL,  lo  :  487.)    Cf.  Hahn,  §  161. 

The  Council  of  Sirmium  in  357  was  the  second  in  that  city.  It  was 
attended  entirely  by  bishops  from  the  West.  But  among  them  were 
Ursacius,  Valens,  and  Germinius,  leaders  of  the  opposition  to  the 
Nicene  creed.  Hosius  under  compulsion  signed  the  following;  see 
Hilary,  loc  cit.     The  Latin  original  is  given  by  Hilary. 


COLLAPSE   OF  ANTI-NICENE   PARTY        317 

It  is  evident  that  there  is  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 
according  as  it  is  believed  throughout  the  whole  world;  and 
His  only  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,  begotten  of  Him  be- 
fore the  ages.  But  we  cannot  and  ought  not  to  say  there 
are  two  Gods.  .  .  . 

But  since  some  or  many  persons  were  disturbed  by  ques- 
tions as  to  substance,  called  in  Greek  ousia,  that  is,  to  make 
it  understood  more  exactly,  as  to  homoousios  or  what  is 
called  homoiousios,  there  ought  to  be  no  mention  of  these 
at  all,  nor  ought  any  one  to  state  them;  for  the  reason  and 
consideration  that  they  are  not  contained  in  the  divine  Scrip- 
tures, and  that  they  are  above  man's  understanding,  nor  can 
any  man  declare  the  birth  of  the  Son,  of  whom  it  is  written : 
"Who  shall  declare  His  generation?"  For  it  is  plain  that 
only  the  Father  knows  how  He  begat  the  Son,  and  the  Son 
how  He  was  begotten  of  the  Father.  There  is  no  question 
that  the  Father  is  greater.  No  one  can  doubt  that  the 
Father  is  greater  than  the  Son,  in  honor,  dignity,  splendor, 
majesty  and  in  the  very  name  Father,  the  Son  himself  testi- 
fying. He  that  sent  Me  is  greater  than  I.  And  no  one  is 
ignorant  that  it  is  Catholic  doctrine  that  there  are  two  per- 
sons of  Father  and  Son;  and  that  the  Father  is  greater,  and 
that  the  Son  is  subordinated  to  the  Father,  together  with  all 
things  which  the  Father  hath  subordinated  to  Him;  and 
that  the  Father  has  no  beginning  and  is  invisible,  immortal, 
and  impassible,  but  that  the  Son  has  been  begotten  of  the 
Father,  God  of  God,  Hght  of  Hght,  and  of  this  Son  the  gen- 
eration, as  is  aforesaid,  no  one  knows  but  His  Father.  And 
that  the  Son  of  God  himself,  our  Lord  and  God,  as  we  read, 
took  flesh  or  a  body,  that  is,  man  of  the  womb  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  as  the  angel  announced.  And  as  all  the  Scriptures 
teach,  and  especially  the  doctor  of  the  Gentiles  himself.  He 
took  of  Mary  the  Virgin,  man,  through  whom  He  suffered. 
And  the  whole  faith  is  summed  up  and  secured  in  this,  that 
the  Trinity  must  always  be  preserved,  as  we  read  in  the 
Gospel:    ''Go  ye  and  baptize  all  nations  in  the  name  of  the 


3i8  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Complete 
and  perfect  is  the  number  of  the  Trinity.  Now  the  Paraclete^ 
or  the  Spirit,  is  through  the  Son:  who  was  sent  and  came  ac- 
cording to  His  promise  in  order  to  instruct,  teach,  and  sanc- 
tify the  Apostles  and  all  beUevers. 

(b)  Creed  of  Nice  A.  D.  359,  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  16. 
(MSG,  82  :  1049.)     Cf.  Hahn,  §  164. 

The  deputies  from  the  Council  of  Ariminum  were  sent  to  Nice,  a 
small  town  in  Thrace,  where  they  met  the  heads  of  the  Arian  party. 
A  creed,  strongly  Arian  in  tendency,  was  given  them  and  they  were 
sent  back  to  Ariminum  to  have  it  accepted.  See  Theodoret,  loc.  cii., 
and  Athanasius,  De  Synodis. 

We  beHeve  in  one  and  only  true  God,  Father  Almighty, 
of  whom  are  all  things.  And  in  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God, 
who  before  all  ages  and  before  every  beginning  was  begotten 
of  God,  through  whom  all  things  were  made,  both  visible  and 
invisible;  begotten,  only  begotten,  alone  of  the  Father  alone, 
God  of  God,  Hke  the  Father  that  begat  Him,  according  to  the 
Scriptures,  whose  generation  no  one  knoweth  except  only 
the  Father  that  begat  Him.  This  only  begotten  Son  of  God, 
sent  by  His  Father,  we  know  to  have  come  down  from  heaven, 
as  it  is  written,  for  the  destruction  of  sin  and  death;  begotten 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  it  is  written,  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh.  Who  companied  with  His  disciples, 
and  when  the  whole  dispensation  was  fulfilled,  according  to 
the  Father's  will,  was  crucified,  dead  and  buried,  and  de- 
scended to  the  world  below,  at  whom  hell  itself  trembled; 
on  the  third  day  He  rose  from  the  dead  and  companied  with 
His  disciples,  and  when  forty  days  were  completed  He  was 
taken  up  into  the  heavens,  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of 
His  Father,  and  is  coming  at  the  last  day  of  the  resurrection, 
in  His  Father's  glory,  to  render  to  every  one  according  to  his 
works.  And  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  the  only  begotten  Son 
of  God,  Jesus  Christ,  both  God  and  Lord,  promised  to  send 
to  the  race  of  men,  the  comforter,  as  it  is  written,  the  spirit 
of  truth,  and  this  Spirit  He  himself  sent  after  He  had  as- 


COLLAPSE   OF  ANTI-NICENE  PARTY        319 

cended  into  the  heavens  and  sat  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father,  from  thence  He  is  coming  to  judge  both  the  quick  and 
the  dead. 

But  the  word  ''substance,"  which  was  simply  inserted  by 
the  Fathers  and  not  being  understood  was  a  cause  of  scan- 
dal to  the  people  because  it  was  not  found  in  the  Scriptures, 
it  hath  seemed  good  to  us  to  remove,  and  that  for  the  future 
no  mention  whatever  be  permitted  of  ''substance,"  because 
the  sacred  Scriptures  nowhere  make  any  mention  of  the 
"substance"  of  the  Father  and  the  Son.  Nor  must  one 
"subsistence"  [hypostasis]  be  named  in  relation  to  the  person 
[prosopon]  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  And  we  call  the 
Son  Hke  the  Father,  as  the  Holy  Scriptures  call  Him  and 
teach.  But  all  heresies,  both  those  already  condemned,  and 
any,  if  such  there  be,  which  have  arisen  against  the  document 
thus  put  forth,  let  them  be  anathema. 

(c)  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  De  Synodis,  §§  88, 89, 91.    (MSL,  10  : 

540.) 

That  the  Homoiousian  party  meant  substantially  the  same  by  their 
term  homoiousios  as  did  the  Homoousians  or  the  Nicene  party,  by 
their  term  homoousios. 

Hilary  was  of  great  importance  in  the  Arian  controversy  in  bringing 
the  Homoiousian  party  of  the  East  and  the  Nicene  party  of  the  West 
to  an  agreement.  The  Eastern  theologians,  who  hesitated  to  accept 
the  Nicene  term,  were  eventually  induced  to  accept,  understanding  by 
the  term  homoousios  the  same  as  homoiousios.     See  below,  §  70. 

§  88.  Holy  brethren,  I  understand  by  homoousios  God 
of  God,  not  of  an  unlike  essence,  not  divided,  but  born;  and 
that  the  Son  has  a  birth  that  is  unique,  of  the  substance  of 
the  unknown  God,  that  He  is  begotten  yet  co-eternal  and 
wholly  like  the  Father.  The  word  homoousios  greatly  helped 
me  already  believing  this.  Why  do  you  condemn  my  faith 
in  the  homoousios,  which  you  cannot  disapprove  by  the 
confession  of  the  homoiousios?  For  you  condemn  my  faith, 
or  rather  your  own,  when  you  condemn  its  verbal  equivalent. 
Does  somebody  else  misunderstand  it?    Let  us  together  con- 


/ 


320  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

demn  the  misunderstanding,  but  not  take  away  the  security 
of  your  faith.  Do  you  think  that  one  must  subscribe  to  the 
Samosetene  Council,  so  that  no  one  may  make  use  of  homoou- 
sios  in  the  sense  of  Paul  of  Samosata?  Then  let  us  sub- 
scribe to  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  so  that  the  Arians  may  not 
impugn  the  word  homoousios.  Have  we  to  fear  that  homoi- 
ousios  does  not  imply  the  same  behef  as  homoousios?  Let  us 
decree  that  there  is  no  difference  between  being  of  one  and 
being  of  a  similar  substance.  But  may  not  the  word  homoou- 
sios be  understood  in  a  wrong  sense?  Let  it  be  proved  that 
it  can  be  understood  in  a  good  sense.  We  hold  one  and  the 
same  sacred  truth.  I  beseech  you  that  the  one  and  the  same 
truth  which  we  hold,  we  should  regard  as  sacred  among  us. 
Forgive  me,  brethren,  as  I  have  so  often  asked  you  to  do. 
You  are  not  Arians;  why,  then,  by  denying  the  homoousios, 
should  you  be  thought  to  be  Arians? 

§  89.  .  .  .  True  likeness  belongs  to  a  true  natural  con- 
nection. But  when  the  true  natural  connection  exists,  the 
homoousios  is  impHed.  It  is  hkeness  according  to  essence 
when  one  piece  of  metal  is  like  another  and  not  plated.  .  .  . 
Nothing  can  be  Hke  gold  but  gold,  or  like  milk  that  does  not 
belong  to  that  species. 

§  91.  I  do  not  know  the  word  homoousios  or  understand 
it  unless  it  confesses  a  similarity  of  essence.  I  call  God  of 
heaven  and  earth  to  witness,  that  when  I  heard  neither  word, 
my  behef  was  always  such  that  I  should  have  interpreted 
homoiousios  by  homoousios.  That  is,  I  beheved  that  noth- 
ing could  be  similar  according  to  nature  unless  it  was  of  the 
same  nature. 

§67.    The  Policy  of  the  Sons  of  Constantine  Toward 
Heathenism  and  Donatism 

Under  the  sons  of  Constantine  a  harsher  poHcy  toward 
heathenism  was  adopted.  Laws  were  passed  forbidding 
heathen  sacrifices  (a,  h),  and  although  these  were  not  carried 


POLICY  OF   SONS  OF   CONSTANTINE        321 

out  vigorously  in  the  West,  where  there  were  many  heathen 
members  of  the  leading  families,  they  were  more  generally 
enforced  in  the  East,  and  heathenism  was  thereby  much  re- 
duced, at  least  in  outward  manifestations.  As  to  heresy, 
the  action  of  the  emperors  and  especially  Constantius  in  his 
constant  endeavor  to  set  aside  the  Nicene  faith  involved 
harsh  measures  against  all  who  differed  from  the  approved 
theology  of  the  court.  Donatism  called  for  special  treatment. 
A  policy  of  conciliation  was  attempted,  but  on  account  of 
the  failure  to  win  over  the  Donatists  and  their  alliance 
with  fierce  revolutionary  fanatics,  the  Circumcellions,  violent 
measures  were  taken  against  them  which  nearly  extirpated 
the  sect. 

(a)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  10,  2;  A.  D.  341. 

This  edict  of  Constantius  is  of  importance  here  as  it  seems  to  imply- 
that  Constantine  did  more  toward  repressing  heathen  sacrifices  than 
to  forbid  those  celebrated  in  private.  It  is,  however,  the  only  evi- 
dence of  his  prohibiting  sacrifice,  and  it  might  have  been  due  to  mis- 
understanding that  his  example  is  here  cited. 

Let  superstition  cease;  let  the  madness  of  sacrifices  be  abol- 
ished. For  whoever,  against  the  law  of  the  divine  prince, 
our  parent  [Constantine]  and  this  command  of  our  clemency, 
shall  celebrate  sacrifices,  let  a  punishment  appropriate  to 
him  and  this  present  decision  be  issued. 

(&)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  10,  3;  A.  D.  342. 

In  the  West  Constans  did  not  enforce  the  law  against  sacrifices  with 
great  severity,  but  tolerated  the  existence  and  even  use  of  certain 
temples  without  the  walls. 

Although  all  superstition  is  to  be  entirely  destroyed,  yet 
we  will  that  the  temple  buildings,  which  are  situated  without 
the  walls,  remain  intact  and  uninjured.  For  since  from  some 
have  arisen  various  sports,  races,  and  contests,  it  is  not  proper 
that  they  should  be  destroyed,  from  which  the  solemnity  of 
ancient  enjoyments  are  furnished  to  the  Roman  people. 

(c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  10,  4;  A.  D.  346. 


322  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

It  is  our  pleasure  that  in  all  places  and  in  all  cities  the  tem- 
ples be  henceforth  closed,  and  access  having  been  forbidden 
to  all,  freedom  to  sin  be  denied  the  wicked.  We  will  that  all 
abstain  from  sacrifices;  that  if  any  one  should  commit  any 
such  act,  let  him  fall  before  the  vengeance  of  the  sword. 
Their  goods,  we  decree,  shall  be  taken  away  entirely  and  re- 
covered to  the  fisc,  and  likewise  rectors  of  provinces  are  to 
be  punished  if  they  neglect  to  punish  for  these  crimes. 

(d)  Optatus,  De  schismate  Donatistarum,  III,  §§3,4.  (MSL, 
II  :  999.) 

The  principal  historical  writer  treating  the  schism  of  the  Donatists 
is  Optatus,  Bishop  of  Mileve.  His  work  on  this  sect  was  written  about 
370  and  revised  and  enlarged  in  385.  It  is  of  primary  importance  not 
merely  for  the  history  but  for  the  dogmatic  discussions  on  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church,  Bk.  II,  the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  the  idea 
of  opus  operatum  as  applied  to  them,  Bk.  V;  in  all  of  which  he  laid  the 
foundation  upon  which  Augustine  built.  In  addition  to  the  passage 
from  Optatus  given  here,  Epistles  88  and  185  by  Augustine  are  acces- 
sible in  translations  and  will  be  found  of  assistance  in  filling  in  the  ac- 
count of  the  Circumcellions.  The  latter  is  known  as  De  correctione 
Donatistarum  and  is  published  in  the  anti-Donatist  writings  of  Au- 
gustine in  PNF,  ser.  I,  vol.  IV;  the  most  important  passages  are  §§ 
15  and  25.  It  is  probable  that  the  party  of  the  Circumcellions  was 
originally  due  to  a  revolt  against  intolerable  agrarian  conditions  and 
that  their  association  with  the  Donatists  was  at  first  slight. 

§  3.  .  .  .  The  Emperor  Constans  did  not  send  Paulus  and 
Macarius  primarily  to  bring  about  unity,  but  with  alms, 
that,  assisted  by  them,  the  poor  of  the  various  churches  might 
be  relieved,  clothed,  and  fed.  When  they  came  to  Donatus, 
your  father,  and  showed  him  why  they  had  come,  he  was 
seized  with  his  accustomed  furious  anger  and  broke  forth 
with  these  words:  "What  has  the  Emperor  to  do  with  the 
Church."  .  .  . 

§  4.  If  anything,  therefore,  has  been  done  harshly  in 
bringing  about  unity,^  you  see,  brother  Parmenianus,  to 
whom  it  ought  to  be  attributed.  Do  you  say  that  the  mil- 
itary was  sought  by  us  Catholics;  if  so,  then  why  did  no  one 

^  I.  e.,  in  forcing  the  Donatists  to  return  to  the  Church. 


POLICY  OF   SONS  OF   CONSTANTINE        323 

see  the  military  in  arms  in  the  proconsular  province?  Paulus 
and  Macarius  came,  everywhere  to  consider  the  poor  and  to 
exhort  individuals  to  unity;  and  when  they  approached 
Bagaja,  then  another  Donatus,  bishop  of  that  city,  desiring 
to  place  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  unity  and  hinder  the  work 
of  those  coming,  whom  we  have  mentioned,  sent  messengers 
throughout  the  neighboring  places  and  all  markets,  and  sum- 
moned the  Circumcellions,  calling  them  Agonistici,  to  come 
to  the  said  place.  And  at  that  time  the  gathering  of  these 
was  desired,  whose  madness  a  Kttle  before  had  been  seen  by 
the  bishops  themselves  to  have  been  impiously  inspired.  For 
when  men  of  this  sort  before  the  unity^  wandered  through 
various  places,  when  Axido  and  Fasir  were  called  by  the  same 
mad  ones  the  leaders  of  the  saints,  no  one  could  be  secure  in 
his  possessions;  written  evidences  of  indebtedness  lost  their 
force;  no  creditor  was  at  Uberty  at  that  time  to  demand  any- 
thing. All  were  terrified  by  the  letters  of  those  who  boasted 
that  they  were  the  leaders  of  the  saints,  and  if  there  was  any 
delay  in  fulfilling  their  commands,  suddenly  a  furious  multi- 
tude hurried  up  and,  terror  going  on  before,  creditors  were 
surrounded  with  a  wall  of  dangers,  so  that  those  who  ought 
to  have  been  asked  for  their  protection  were  by  fear  of  death 
compelled  to  use  humble  prayers.  Each  one  hastened  to 
abandon  his  most  important  duties;  and  profit  was  thought 
to  have  come  from  these  outrages.  Even  the  roads  were  no 
longer  at  all  safe,  because  masters,  turned  out  of  their  car- 
riages, ran  humbly  before  their  slaves  sitting  in  the  places  of 
their  masters.  By  the  judgment  and  rule  of  these  the  order 
of  rank  between  masters  and  servants  was  changed.  There- 
fore when  there  arose  complaint  against  the  bishops  of  your 
party,  they  are  said  to  have  written  to  Count  Taurinus,  that 
such  men  could  not  be  corrected  in  the  Church,  and  they 
demanded  that  they  should  receive  discipline  from  the  said 
count.     Then  Taurinus,  in  response  to  their  letters,  com- 

^  The  temporary  defeat  of  the  Donatist  party  which  was  celebrated  at  the 
Council  of  Carthage  in  348-349.     See  Hefele,  §  70. 


324  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

manded  an  armed  body  of  soldiers  to  go  through  the  markets 
where  the  Circumcellions  were  accustomed  to  wander.  In 
Octavum  very  many  were  killed,  many  were  beheaded  and 
their  bodies,  even  to  the  present  day,  can  be  counted  by  the 
white  altars  or  tables.^  When  first  some  of  their  number 
were  buried  in  the  basilicas,  Clarus,  a  presbyter  in  Subbulum, 
was  compelled  by  his  bishop  to  disinter  those  buried.  Whence 
it  is  reported  that  what  was  done  had  been  commanded  to  be 
done,  when  it  is  admitted  that  sepulture  in  the  house  of 
God  is  not  granted.  Afterward  the  multitude  of  these  peo- 
ple increased.  In  this  way  Donatus  of  Bagaja  found  whence 
he  might  lead  against  Macarius  a  raging  mob.  Of  that  sort 
were  those  who  were  to  their  own  ruin  murderers  of  them- 
selves in  their  desire  for  a  false  martyrdom.  Of  these,  also, 
were  those  who  rushed  headlong  and  threw  themselves  down 
from  the  summits  of  lofty  mountains.  Behold  from  what 
numbers  the  second  Bishop  Donatus  formed  his  cohorts! 
Those  who  were  bearing  treasure  which  they  had  obtained 
for  the  poor  were  held  back  by  fear.  They  decided  in  so 
great  a  predicament  to  demand  from  Count  Sylvester  armed 
soldiery,  not  that  by  these  they  should  do  violence  to  any  one, 
but  that  they  might  stop  the  force  drawn  up  by  the  aforesaid 
Bishop  Donatus.  Thus  it  happened  that  an  armed  soldiery 
was  seen.  Now,  as  to  what  followed,  see  to  whom  it  ought  or 
can  be  ascribed.  They  had  there  an  infinite  number  of  those 
summoned,  and  it  is  certain  that  a  supply  of  provisions  for  a 
year  had  been  provided.  Of  the  basilicas  they  made  a  sort 
of  public  granary,  and  awaited  the  coming  of  those  against 
whom  they  might  expend  their  fury,  if  the  presence  of  armed 
soldiery  had  not  prevented  them.  For  when,  before  the 
soldiers  came,  the  metatores,^  as  was  the  custom,  were  sent, 
they  were  not  properly  received,  contrary  to  the  apostolic  pre- 
cept, "honor  to  whom  honor,  custom  to  whom  custom,  trib- 
ute to  whom  tribute,  owe  no  man  anything. '^     For  those  who 

1  Tombs  built  in  the  shape  of  altars  which  were  table-shaped. 

2  The  metatores  were  those  who  were  sent  ahead  of  a  troop  of  soldiers  to  pro- 
vide for  quartering  them  upon  the  inhabitants. 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  325 

had  been  sent  with  their  horses  were  smitten  by  those  whose 
names  you  have  made  public  with  malicious  intent.  They 
were  the  authors  of  their  own  wrong;  and  what  they  could 
suffer  they  themselves  taught  by  these  outrages.  The  sol- 
diers who  had  been  maltreated  returned  to  their  fellows,  and 
for  what  two  or  three  suffered,  all  grieved.  All  were  roused, 
and  their  officers  could  not  restrain  the  angered  soldiers. 

§  68.    Julian  the  Apostate 

The  reign  of  JuKan  the  Apostate  (361-363)  is  important 
in  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  in  the  first  place,  as 
indicating  the  slight  hold  which  heathenism  had  retained  as 
a  system  upon  the  bulk  of  the  people  and  the  impossibility 
of  reviving  it  in  any  form  in  which  it  might  compete  with  the 
Church.  Julian  attempted  to  inject  into  a  purified  heathen- 
ism those  elements  in  the  Christian  Church  which  he  was 
forced  to  admire.  The  result  was  a  fantastic  mixture  of  rites 
and  measures  with  which  the  heathen  would  have  nothing  to 
do.  In  the  second  place,  in  the  development  of  the  Church's 
doctrinal  system,  and  especially  in  the  Arian  controversy,  the 
reign  of  Julian  gave  the  contestants,  who  were  obHged  to 
stand  together  against  a  common  enemy,  reason  for  examining 
in  a  new  way  the  points  they  had  in  common,  and  enabled 
them  to  see  that  some  at  least  differed  more  over  the  expres- 
sion than  over  the  content  of  their  faith.  The  character 
of  Julian  has  long  been  a  favorite  subject  of  study  and  espe- 
cially the  motives  that  induced  him  to  abandon  Christianity 
for  the  Neo-Platonic  revival  of  heathenism. 

Additional  source  material:  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec.y  III;  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,  Roman  History,  XVI-XXV,  translated  by  C.  D.  Yonge 
(Bohn's  Classical  Library);  Select  Works  of  Julian,  translated  by 
C.  W.  King  (Bohn). 

(a)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  i.     (MSG,  67  :  368.) 

The  Emperor  Julian. 

The  account  of  the  Emperor  Julian  as  given  by  Socrates  is  probably 
the  best  we  have.     It  is,  on  the  whole,  a  model  of  a  fair  statement, ' 


326  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

such  as  is  characteristic  of  the  history  of  Socrates  in  nearly  all  its 
parts.  In  spite  of  its  length  it  is  worthy  of  a  place  in  its  entirety,  as 
it  explains  the  antecedents  of  a  character  which  the  world  has  had 
difficulty  in  understanding. 

Constantine,  who  gave  Byzantium  his  own  name,  had  two 
brothers  born  of  the  same  father  but  by  a  different  mother, 
of  these  one  was  named  Dalmatius,  the  other  Constantius. 
Dalmatius  had  a  son  of  the  same  name  as  his  own;  Con- 
stantius had  two  sons,  Gallus  and  Juhan.  Now,  as  on  the 
death  of  Constantine,  the  founder  of  Constantinople,  the  sol- 
diery had  put  the  younger  brother  Constantius  to  death,  the 
lives  of  his  two  orphaned  children  were  also  endangered; 
but  a  disease,  apparently  fatal,  preserved  Gallus  from  the 
violence  of  his  father's  murderers;  and  as  to  Juhan,  his  age — 
for  he  was  only  eight  years  old  at  the  time — protected  him. 
The  Emperor's  jealousy  toward  them  having  been  subdued, 
Gallus  attended  schools  at  Ephesus  in  Ionia,  in  which  coun- 
try considerable  possessions  had  been  left  them  by  their 
parents.  Juhan,  however,  when  he  was  grown  up  pursued 
his  studies  at  Constantinople,  going  constantly  to  the  palace, 
where  the  schools  then  were,  in  simple  attire  and  under 
the  care  of  the  eunuch  Mardonius.  In  grammar,  Nicocles, 
the  Lacedaemonian,  was  his  instructor;  and  EcboHus,  the 
sophist,  who  was  at  that  time  a  Christian,  taught  him  rhet- 
oric; for  the  Emperor  Constantius  had  made  provision  that 
he  should  have  no  pagan  masters,  lest  he  should  be  seduced 
to  pagan  superstitions;  for  Julian  was  a  Christian  at  the  be- 
ginning. Since  he  made  great  progress  in  literature,  the 
report  began  to  spread  that  he  was  capable  of  ruhng  the 
Roman  Empire;  and  this  popular  rumor  becoming  generally 
spread  abroad,  greatly  disquieted  the  Emperor.  Therefore 
he  removed  him  from  the  great  city  to  Nicomedia,  forbidding 
him  at  the  same  time  to  frequent  the  school  of  Libanius  the 
Syrian  sophist.  For  Libanius,  having  been  driven  away  by 
the  teachers  of  Constantinople,  had  opened  a  school  at  Nico- 
media.    Here  he  gave  vent  to  his  indignation  against  the 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  327 

teachers  in  his  treatise  composed  against  them.  Julian,  how- 
ever, was  interdicted  from  being  his  auditor,  because  Liba- 
nius  was  a  pagan  in  rehgion;  nevertheless  because  he  admired 
his  orations,  he  procured  them  and  read  them  secretly  and 
diligently.  As  he  was  becoming  very  expert  in  the  rhetorical 
art,  Maximus  the  philosopher  arrived  in  Nicomedia,  not  the 
Byzantine,  Euclid's  father,  but  the  Ephesian  whom  the  Em- 
peror Valentinian  afterward  caused  to  be  executed  as  a  prac- 
ticer  of  magic.  This  took  place  later;  at  that  time  the  only 
thing  that  attracted  him  to  Nicomedia  was  the  fame  of  Julian. 
Ha\dng  obtained  from  him  a  taste  for  the  principles  of  phi- 
losophy, Julian  began  to  imitate  the  religion  of  his  teacher, 
who  had  instilled  into  his  mind  a  desire  for  the  Empire.  When 
these  things  reached  the  ears  of  the  Emperor,  wavering  be- 
tween hope  and  fear,  Julian  became  very  anxious  to  lull  the 
suspicion  that  had  been  awakened,  and  he  who  was  at  first 
truly  a  Christian  then  became  one  in  pretence.  Shaved  to 
the  very  skin,  he  pretended  to  live  the  monastic  life;  and 
while  in  private  he  pursued  philosophical  studies,  in  public 
he  read  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Christian  Church.  More- 
over, he  was  appointed  reader  of  the  church  in  Nicomedia. 
Thus  by  these  pretexts  he  escaped  the  Emperor's  displeasure. 
Now  he  did  all  this  from  fear,  but  he  by  no  means  aban- 
doned his  hope;  telling  many  of  his  friends  that  times  would 
be  happier  when  he  should  possess  all.  While  his  affairs  were 
in  this  condition  his  brother  Gallus,  who  had  been  created 
Caesar,  when  he  was  on  his  way  to  the  East  came  to  Nicomedia 
to  see  him.  But  when  Gallus  was  slain  shortly  after,  Julian 
was  immediately  suspected  by  the  Emperor;  therefore  the 
latter  directed  that  he  should  be  kept  under  guard;  he  soon 
found  means,  however,  of  escaping  from  his  guards,  and  flee- 
ing from  place  to  place  he  managed  to  be  in  safety.  At  last 
Eusebia,  the  wife  of  the  Emperor,  having  discovered  him  in 
his  retreat,  persuaded  the  Emperor  to  do  him  no  harm,  and 
to  permit  him  to  go  to  Athens  to  study  philosophy.  From 
thence— to  be  brief — the  Emperor  recalled  him  and  after- 


328  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

ward  created  him  Caesar,  and  having  given  him  his  own  sis- 
ter Helen  in  marriage,  he  sent  him  to  Gaul  against  the 
barbarians.  For  the  barbarians  whom  the  Emperor  Con- 
stantius  had  hired  as  auxihary  forces  against  Magnentius,  be- 
ing of  no  use  against  that  usurper,  were  pillaging  the  Roman 
cities.  Inasmuch  as  he  was  young  he  ordered  him  to  under- 
take nothing  without  consulting  the  other  military  chiefs. 
.  .  .  JuHan's  complaint  to  the  Emperor  of  the  inertness  of 
his  military  officers  procured  for  him  a  coadjutor  in  the  com- 
mand more  in  sympathy  with  his  ardor;  and  by  their  com- 
bined efforts  an  assault  was  made  upon  the  barbarians.  But 
they  sent  him  an  embassy,  assuring  him  that  they  had  been 
ordered  by  letters  of  the  Emperor  to  march  into  Roman  ter- 
ritories, and  they  showed  him  the  letters.  But  he  cast  the 
ambassadors  into  prison,  vigorously  attacked  the  forces  of 
the  enemy  and  totally  defeated  them;  and  having  taken  their 
king  prisoner,  he  sent  him  to  Constantius,  After  these  suc- 
cesses he  was  proclaimed  Emperor  by  the  soldiers;  and  inas- 
much as  there  was  no  imperial  crown  at  hand,  one  of  the 
guards  took  the  chain  which  he  wore  around  his  own  neck  and 
placed  it  upon  JuHan's  head.  Thus  Julian  became  Emperor; 
but  whether  he  subsequently  conducted  himself  as  a  philos- 
opher, let  my  readers  determine.  For  he  neither  sent  an  em- 
bassy to  Constantius,  nor  paid  him  the  least  homage  in  ac- 
knowledgment of  past  favors;  but  conducted  everything 
just  as  it  pleased  him.  He  changed  the  rulers  of  the  prov- 
inces, and  he  sought  to  bring  Constantius  into  contempt  by 
reciting  pubHcly  in  every  city  the  letters  which  Constantius 
had  written  to  the  barbarians.  For  this  reason  the  cities 
revolted  from  Constantius  and  attached  themselves  to  him. 
Then  he  openly  put  off  the  pretence  of  being  a  Christian; 
going  about  to  the  various  cities,  he  opened  the  pagan  tem- 
ples, offering  sacrifices  to  the  idols,  and  designating  himself 
'^Pontifex  Maximus";  and  the  heathen  celebrated  their  pagan 
festivals  with  pagan  rites.  By  doing  these  things  he  excited 
a  civil  war  against  Constantius;  and  thus  as  far  as  he  was 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  329 

concerned  all  the  evils  involved  in  war  happened.  For  this 
philosopher's  desire  could  not  have  been  fulfilled  without 
much  bloodshed.  But  God,  who  is  the  judge  of  His  own 
counsels,  checked  the  fury  of  these  antagonists  without  detri- 
ment to  the  State  by  the  removal  of  one  of  them.  For  when 
Julian  arrived  among  the  Thracians,  it  was  announced  that 
Constantius  was  dead.  And  thus  did  the  Roman  Empire 
at  that  time  escape  the  intestine  strife.  Julian  entered  Con- 
stantinople and  at  once  considered  how  he  might  conciliate 
the  masses  and  secure  popular  favor.  Accordingly,  he  had 
recourse  to  the  following  measures:  he  knew  that  Constan- 
tius was  hated  by  all  the  people  who  held  the  homoousian 
faith  and  had  driven  them  from  the  churches  and  had  pro- 
scribed and  exiled  their  bishops.  He  was  aware,  also,  that  the 
pagans  were  extremely  discontented  because  they  had  been 
forbidden  to  sacrifice  to  their  gods,  and  were  anxious  to  get 
their  temples  opened  and  to  be  at  liberty  to  offer  sacrifices 
to  their  idols.  Thus  he  knew  that  both  classes  secretly  en- 
tertained hostile  feelings  toward  his  predecessor,  and  at  the 
same  time  the  people  in  general  were  exceedingly  exasperated 
by  the  violence  of  the  eunuchs,  and  especially  by  the  rapacity 
of  Eusebius,  the  chief  officer  of  the  imperial  bed-chamber. 
Therefore  he  treated  all  with  craftiness.  With  some  he  dis- 
sembled; others  he  attached  to  himself  by  conferring  obliga- 
tions upon  them,  led  by  a  desire  for  vainglory;  but  to  all  he 
manifested  how  he  stood  toward  the  heathen  religion.  And 
first,  in  order  to  slander  Constantius  and  condemn  him  as 
cruel  toward  his  subjects  among  the  people  generally,  he  re- 
called the  exiled  bishops  and  restored  to  them  their  confiscated 
estates.  He  next  commanded  suitable  agents  to  open  the 
pagan  temples  mthout  delay.  Then  he  directed  that  those 
who  had  been  treated  unjustly  by  the  eunuchs  should  receive 
back  the  property  of  which  they  had  been  plundered.  Euse- 
bius, the  chief  officer  of  the  imperial  bed-chamber,  he  punished 
with  death,  not  only  on  account  of  the  injuries  he  had  in- 
flicted on  others,  but  because  he  was  assured  that  it  was 


330  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

through  his  machinations  his  brother  Gallus  had  been  killed. 
The  body  of  Constantius  he  honored  with  an  imperial  funeral, 
but  he  expelled  the  eunuchs,  the  barbers,  and  cooks  from  the 
palace.  ...  At  night,  remaining  awake,  he  wrote  orations 
which  he  afterward  delivered  in  the  Senate,  going  thither  from 
the  palace,  though  in  fact  he  was  the  first  and  only  Emperor 
since  the  time  of  JuHus  Cassar  who  made  speeches  in  that 
assembly.  He  honored  those  who  were  eminent  for  hterary 
attainments,  and  especially  those  who  taught  philosophy; 
in  consequence  of  which  an  abundance  of  pretenders  to  learn- 
ing of  this  sort  resorted  to  the  palace  from  all  quarters,  men 
who  wore  their  palHums  and  were  more  conspicuous  for  their 
costume  than  for  their  erudition.  These  impostors,  who  in- 
variably adopted  the  rehgious  sentiments  of  their  prince, 
were  inimical  to  the  welfare  of  the  Christians;  but  since 
Julian  himself  was  overcome  by  excessive  vanity  he  derided 
all  his  predecessors  in  a  book  which  he  wrote,  entitled  "The 
Caesars."  Led  by  the  same  haughty  disposition,  he  com- 
posed treatises  against  the  Christians  as  well. 

(b)  Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  3.     (MSG,  67  :  1217.) 
Julian's  restoration  of  heathenism. 

When  JuHan  was  placed  in  sole  possession  of  the  Empire  he 
commanded  all  the  temples  throughout  the  East  to  be  reop- 
ened; and  he  also  commanded  that  those  which  had  been 
neglected  to  be  repaired,  those  which  had  fallen  into  ruins  to 
be  rebuilt,  and  the  altars  to  be  restored.  He  assigned  con- 
siderable money  for  this  purpose.  He  restored  the  customs 
of  antiquity  and  the  ancestral  ceremonies  in  the  cities  and  the 
sacrifices.  He  himself  offered  Kbations  openly  and  sacrificed 
pubKcly;  and  held  in  honor  those  who  were  zealous  in  these 
things.  He  restored  to  their  ancient  privileges  the  initiators 
and  the  priests,  the  hierophants  and  the  servants  of  the  tem- 
ples, and  confirmed  the  legislation  of  former  emperors  in  their 
favor.  He  granted  them  exemption  from  duties  and  other 
burdens  as  they  had  previously  had  had  such  exemption. 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  331 

He  restored  to  the  temple  guardians  the  provisions  which 
had  been  aboHshed.  He  commanded  them  to  be  pure  from 
meats,  and  to  abstain  from  whatever,  according  to  pagan 
opinion,  was  not  befitting  him  who  had  announced  his  pur- 
pose of  leading  a  pure  life. 

(c)  Sozomenus,  HisL  Ec,  V,  5.     (MSG,  67  :  1225.) 

Julian's  measures  against  the  Christians. 

Among  those  who  benefited  by  the  recall  of  those  who  had  been 
banished  for  their  religious  beliefs  were  not  only  the  orthodox  Chris- 
tians who  suffered  under  Constantius,  but  also  the  Donatists  and 
others  who  had  been  expelled  from  their  homes  by  the  previous  em- 
perors. 

Julian  recalled  all  who,  during  the  reign  of  Constantius,  had 
been  banished  on  account  of  their  religious  behefs^  and  restored 
to  them  their  property  which  had  been  confiscated  by  law. 
He  charged  the  people  not  to  commit  any  act  of  injustice 
against  any  of  the  Christians,  not  to  insult  them  and  not  to 
constrain  them  to  sacrifice  unwilHngly.  ...  He  deprived  the 
clergy,  however,  of  their  immunities,  honors,  and  provisions 
which  Constantine  had  conferred,  repealed  the  laws  which 
had  been  enacted  in  their  favor,  and  reinforced  their  statu- 
tory liabihties.  He  even  compelled  the  virgins  and  widows, 
who  on  accoimt  of  their  poverty  were  reckoned  among  the 
clergy,  to  refund  the  provision  which  had  been  assigned  them 
from  the  pubhc  treasury.  ...  In  the  intensity  of  his  hatred 
of  the  faith,  he  seized  every  opportunity  to  ruin  the  Church. 
He  deprived  it  of  its  property,  votive  offerings,  and  sacred 
vessels,  and  condemned  those  who  had  demoHshed  temples 
during  the  reign  of  Constantine  and  Constantius  to  rebuild 
them  or  to  defray  the  expense  of  re-erection.  On  this  ground, 
since  they  were  unable  to  repay  the  sum  and  also  on  account 
of  the  search  after  sacred  money,  many  of  the  priests,  clergy, 
and  other  Christians  were  cruelly  tortured  and  cast  into  prison. 
...  He  recalled  the  priests  who  had  been  banished  by  the 
Emperor  Constantius;  but  it  is  said  that  he  issued  this  order  in 
their  behalf,  not  out  of  mercy,  but  that  through  contention 


332  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

among  themselves  the  churches  might  be  involved  in  fra- 
ternal strife  and  might  fall  away  from  their  law,  or  because 
he  wished  to  asperse  the  memory  of  Constantius. 

{d)  Juhan,  Ep.  49,  ad  Arsacium;  Julian,  Imp.,  EpistulcB,  ed. 
Hertlein,  Leipsic,  1875  /.;  also  in  Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  V, 
16.     (MSG,  67  :  1260.) 

To  Arsacius,  High  Priest  of  Galatia.  Hellenism^  does  not 
flourish  as  we  would  have  it,  because  of  its  votaries.  The 
worship  of  the  gods,  however,  is  grand  and  magnificent  be- 
yond all  our  prayers  and  hopes.  Let  our  Adrastea  be  pro- 
pitious to  these  words.  No  one  a  little  while  ago  could  have 
dared  to  look  for  such  and  so  great  a  change  in  a  short  time. 
But  do  we  think  that  these  things  are  enough,  and  not  rather 
consider  that  humanity  shown  strangers,  the  reverent  dil- 
igence shown  in  burying  the  dead,  and  the  false  holiness  as 
to  their  lives  have  principally  advanced  atheism?^  Each  of 
these  things  is  needful,  I  think,  to  be  faithfully  practised 
among  us.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  you  alone  should  be  such, 
but  in  general  all  the  priests,  as  many  as  there  are  throughout 
Galatia,  whom  you  must  either  shame  or  persuade  to  be 
zealous,  or  else  deprive  them  of  their  priestly  office,  if  they 
do  not  come  with  their  wives,  children,  and  servants  to  the 
temples  of  the  gods,  or  if  they  support  servants,  sons,  or 
wives  who  are  impious  toward  the  gods  and  prefer  atheism  to 
piety.  Then  exhort  the  priests  not  to  frequent  the  theatres, 
not  to  drink  in  taverns,  nor  to  practise  any  art  or  business 
which  is  shameful  or  menial.  Honor  those  who  comply, 
expel  those  who  disobey.  Estabhsh  hostelries  in  every  city, 
so  that  strangers,  or  whoever  has  need  of  money,  may  enjoy 
our  philanthropy,  not  merely  those  of  our  own,  but  also  those 
of  other  religions.  I  have  meanwhile  made  plans  by  which 
you  will  be  able  to  meet  the  expense.  I  have  commanded 
that  throughout  the  whole  of  Galatia  annually  thirty  thousand 
bushels  of  corn  and  sixty  thousand  measures  of  wine  be  given, 

^The  religion  of  the  pagans.  ^I.  e.,  Christianity. 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  333 

of  which  the  fifth  part  I  order  to  be  devoted  to  the  support 
of  the  poor  who  attend  upon  the  priests;  and  the  rest  is  to  be 
distributed  by  us  among  strangers  and  beggars.  For  if  there 
is  not  one  among  the  Jews  who  begs,  and  even  the  impious 
Gahleans,  in  addition  to  their  own,  support  also  ours,  it  is 
shameful  that  our  poor  should  be  wanting  our  aid. 

(e)  Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  16.     (MSG,  67  :  1260.) 
Measures  taken  by  Julian  for  the  restoration  of  heathenism. 

The  Emperor,  who  had  long  since  been  eager  that  Hellenism 
should  prevail  through  the  Empire,  was  bitterly  grieved  see- 
ing it  excelled  by  Christianity.  The  temples,  however,  were 
kept  open;  the  sacrifices  and  the  ancient  festivals  appeared 
to  him  in  all  the  cities  to  come  from  his  will.  He  grieved  that 
when  he  considered  that  if  they  should  be  deprived  of  his  care 
they  would  experience  a  speedy  change.  He  was  particu- 
larly chagrined  on  discovering  that  the  wives,  children,  and 
servants  of  many  pagan  priests  professed  Christianity.  On 
reflecting  that  the  Christian  religion  had  a  support  in  the  hfe 
and  behavior  of  those  professing  it,  he  determined  to  intro- 
duce into  the  pagan  temples  everywhere  the  order  and  dis- 
cipline of  the  Christian  rehgion:  by  orders  and  degrees  of  the 
ministry,  by  teachers  and  readers  to  give  instruction  in  pagan 
doctrines  and  exhortations,  by  appointed  prayers  on  certain 
days  and  at  stated  hours,  by  monasteries  both  for  men  and 
for  women  who  desired  to  live  in  philosophical  retirement, 
likewise  hospitals  for  the  rehef  of  strangers  and  of  the  poor, 
and  by  other  philanthropy  toward  the  poor  to  glorify  the 
Hellenic  doctrine.  He  commanded  that  a  suitable  correction 
be  appointed  by  way  of  penance  after  the  Christian  tradi- 
tion for  voluntary  and  involuntary  transgressions.  He  is 
said  to  have  admired  especially  the  letters  of  recommendation 
of  the  bishops  by  which  they  commended  travellers  to  other 
bishops,  so  that  coming  from  anywhere  they  might  go  to  any 
one  and  be  hospitably  received  as  known  and  as  friends,  and 
be  cared  for  kindly  on  the  evidence  of  these  testimonials. ' 


334  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

Considering  also  these  things,  he  endeavored  to  accustom  the 
pagans  to  Christian  practices. 

(/■)  Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  i8.     (MSG,  67  :  1269.) 
Cf.  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  16. 

Julian  forbade  the  children  of  Christians  to  be  instructed 
in  the  writings  of  the  Greek  poets  and  authors,  and  to  frequent 
the  pubhc  schools.  ...  He  did  not  permit  Christians  to  be 
educated  in  the  learning  of  the  Greeks,  since  he  considered 
that  only  from  them  the  power  of  persuasion  was  gained. 
ApoUinaris,^  therefore,  at  that  time  employed  his  great  learn- 
ing and  ingenuity  in  the  production  of  a  heroic  epic  on  the 
antiquities  of  the  Hebrews  to  the  reign  of  Saul  as  a  substitute 
for  the  poem  of  Homer.  ...  He  also  wrote  comedies  in  imita- 
tion of  Menander,  and  imitated  the  tragedies  of  Euripides 
and  the  odes  of  Pindar.  .  .  .  Were  it  not  that  men  were 
accustomed  to  venerate  antiquity  and  to  love  that  to 
which  they  are  accustomed,  the  works  of  ApoHinaris  would 
be  equally  praised  and  taught. 

(g)  Juhan,  Epistula  42. 

Edict  against  Christian  teachers  of  the  classics. 

This  is  the  famous  decree  prohibiting  Christians  from  teaching  the 
Greek  classics,  and  was  quite  generally  understood  by  Christians  as 
preventing  them  from  studying  the  same. 

I  think  true  culture  consists  not  in  proficiency  in  words  and 
speech,  but  in  a  condition  of  mind  which  has  sound  intentions 
and  right  opinions  concerning  good  and  evil,  the  honorable 
and  the  base.  Whoever,  therefore,  thinks  one  thing  and 
teaches  those  about  him  another  appears  to  be  as  wanting  in 
culture  as  in  honor.  If  in  trifles  there  is  a  difference  between 
thought  and  speech,  it  is  nevertheless  an  evil  in  some  way 
to  be  endured;  but  if  in  important  matters  any  one  thinks 
one  thing  and  teaches  in  opposition  to  what  he  thinks,  this 
is  the  trick  of  charlatans,  the  act  not  of  good  men,  but  of 

^  See  DCB,  art.  "ApoHinaris  the  Elder." 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE  335 

those  who  are  thoroughly  depraved,  especially  in  the  case 
of  those  who  teach  what  they  regard  as  most  worthless,  de- 
ceiving and  enticing  by  flattery  into  evil  those  whom  they 
wish  to  use  for  their  own  purposes.  All  those  who  undertake 
to  teach  anything  should  be  upright  in  life  and  not  cherish 
in  their  minds  ideas  which  are  in  opposition  to  those  commonly 
received;  most  of  all  I  think  that  such  they  ought  to  be  who 
converse  with  the  young  on  learning,  or  who  explain  the  writ- 
ings of  the  ancients,  whether  they  are  teachers  of  eloquence 
or  of  rhetoric,  and  still  more  if  they  are  sophists.  For  they 
aim  to  be  not  merely  teachers  of  words  but  of  morals  as  well, 
and  claim  instruction  in  political  science  as  belonging  to  their 
field.  Whether  this  be  true,  I  will  leave  undetermined.  But 
praising  them  as  those  who  thus  strive  for  fine  professions, 
I  would  praise  them  still  more  if  they  neither  lied  nor  con- 
tradicted themselves,  thinking  one  thing  and  teaching  their 
pupils  another.  Homer,  Hesiod,  Demosthenes,  Herodotus, 
Thucydides,  Isocrates,  and  Lysias  were  indebted  to  the  gods 
for  all  their  science.  Did  they  not  think  that  they  were 
under  the  protection  of  Hermes  and  of  the  Muses?  It  seems 
to  me,  therefore,  absurd  that  those  who  explain  their  writings 
should  despise  the  gods  they  honored.  But  when  I  think  it 
is  absurd,  I  do  not  say  that,  on  account  of  their  pupils,  they 
should  alter  their  opinions;  but  I  give  them  the  choice,  either 
not  to  teach  what  they  do  not  hold  as  good,  or,  if  they  prefer 
to  teach,  first  to  convince  their  pupils  that  Homer,  Hesiod, 
or  any  of  those  whom  they  explain  and  condemn,  is  not  so 
godless  and  foolish  in  respect  to  the  gods  as  they  represent 
him  to  be.  For  since  they  draw  their  support  and  make  gain 
from  what  these  have  written,  they  confess  themselves  most 
sordidly  greedy  of  gain,  wilHng  to  do  anything  for  a  few 
drachmas.  Flitherto  there  were  many  causes  for  the  lack  of 
attendance  upon  the  temples,  and  overhanging  fear  gave  an 
excuse  for  keeping  secret  the  right  teaching  concerning  the 
gods.  Now,  however,  since  the  gods  have  granted  us  free- 
dom, it  seems  to  me  absurd  that  men  should  teach  what  they 


336  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

do  not  regard  as  good.  If  they  believe  that  all  those  men  are 
wise  whose  writings  they  expound  and  as  whose  prophets 
they  sit,  let  them  first  imitate  their  piety  toward  the  gods; 
but  if  they  think  that  these  writers  erred  concerning  the  most 
honored  gods,  let  them  go  into  the  churches  of  the  Galileans 
and  expound  Matthew  and  Luke,  believing  whom  you  for- 
bid attendance  upon  the  sacrifices.  I  would  that  your  ears 
and  tongues  were  born  again,  as  you  would  say,  of  those  things 
in  which  I  always  take  part,  and  whoever  loves  me  thinks  and 
does.  This  law  is  to  apply  to  teachers  and  instructors  gen- 
erally. Whoever  among  the  youth  wishes  to  make  use  of 
their  instruction  is  not  forbidden.  For  it  would  not  be  fair 
in  the  case  of  those  who  are  yet  youths  and  do  not  know 
which  way  to  turn,  to  forbid  the  best  way,  and  through  fear 
to  compel  them  to  remain  unwiUingly  by  their  ancestral 
institutions.  Although  it  would  be  right  to  cure  such  people 
against  their  wills  as  being  insane,  yet  it  is  permitted  all  to 
suffer  under  this  disease.  For  it  is  my  opinion  that  the  igno- 
rant should  be  instructed,  not  punished. 

CHAPTER  III.  THE  TRIUMPH  OF  THE  NEW  NICENE 
ORTHODOXY  OVER  HETERODOXY  AND  HEATHENISM 

The  Arian  controversy  was  the  most  important  series  of 
events  in  the  internal  history  of  the  Christian  Church  in  the 
fourth  century,  without  reference  to  the  truth  or  error  of  the 
positions  taken  or  the  rightful  place  of  dogma  within  the 
Church.  It  roused  more  difficulties,  problems,  and  disputes, 
led  to  more  persecutions,  ended  in  greater  party  triumphs 
than  any  other  ecclesiastical  or  religious  movement.  It 
entered  upon  its  last  important  phase  about  the  time  of  the 
accession  of  the  Emperor  Julian.  From  that  time  the  par- 
ties began  to  recognize  their  real  affiliations  and  sought  a 
basis  of  union  in  a  common  principle.  The  effect  was  that 
on  the  accession  of  Christian  emperors  the  Church  was  able 
to   advance  rapidly  toward  a  definitive  statement.     Of  the 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  337 

emperors  that  followed  Julian,  Valentinian  I  (364-375),  who 
ruled  in  the  West,  took  a  moderate  and  tolerant  position  in 
the  question  regarding  the  existence  of  heathenism  alongside 
of  the  Church  and  heretical  parties  within  the  Church,  though 
afterward  harsher  measures  were  taken  by  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor (§  69).  In  the  East  his  colleague  Valens  (364-368) 
supported  the  extreme  Arian  party  and  persecuted  the  other 
parties,  at  the  same  time  tolerating  heathenism.  This  only 
brought  the  anti-Arians  more  closely  together  as  a  new  party 
on  the  basis  of  a  new  interpretation  of  the  Nicene  formula 
(§  70;  ^/-  §  66,  c).  On  the  death  of  Valens  at  Adrianople, 
378,  an  opportunity  was  given  this  new  party,  which  it  has 
become  customary  to  call  the  New  Nicene  party,  to  support 
Theodosius  (379-395)  in  his  work  of  putting  through  the 
orthodox  formula  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  381  (§  71). 

§  69.  The  Emperors  from  Jovian  to  Theodosius  and 
Their  Policy  toward  Heathenism  and  Arianism. 

§  70.     The  Dogmatic  Parties  and  Their  Mutual  Relations. 

§  71.  The  Emperor  Theodosius  and  the  Triumph  of  the 
New  Nicene  Orthodoxy  at  the  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople, A.  D.  381. 

§  69.    The  Emperors   from  Jovian  to  Theodosius  and 
Their  Policy  toward  Heathenism  and  Arjanism 

The  reign  of  Jovian  lasted  so  short  a  time,  June,  2>^2>y  to 
February,  364,  that  he  had  no  time  to  develop  a  policy,  and 
the  assertion  of  Theodoret  that  he  extinguished  the  heathen 
sacrificial  fires  is  doubtful.  On  the  death  of  Jovian,  Val- 
entinian was  elected  Emperor,  who  soon  associated  with  him- 
self his  brother  Valens  as  his  colleague  for  the  East.  The 
two  were  tolerant  toward  heathenism,  but  Valens  took  an 
active  part  in  favor  of  Arianism,  while  Valentinian  held  aloof 
from  doctrinal  controversy.  On  the  death  of  Valentinian  I, 
his  sons  Gratian  (murdered  at  Lyons,  383)  and  Valentinian 
II    (murdered  at  Vienne  by  Arbogast,  392),   succeeded   to 


338  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

the  Empire.  Under  them  the  policy  of  toleration  ceased, 
heathenism  was  proscribed.  In  the  East  under  Theodosius, 
appointed  colleague  of  Gratian  in  379,  the  same  policy  was 
enforced.  Arianism  was  now  put  down  with  a  strong  hand 
in  both  parts  of  the  Empire. 

(a)  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  Roman  History ,  XXX,  9,  §  5. 

The  religious  policy  of  Valentinian  I. 

Ammianus  Marcellinus  is  probably  the  best  of  the  later  Roman  his- 
torians, and  is  the  chief  authority  for  much  of  the  secular  history  from 
353  to  378,  in  which  period  he  is  a  source  of  the  first  rank,  writing  from 
personal  observation  and  first-hand  information.  Ammianus  was  him- 
self a  heathen,  but  he  seems  not  to  have  been  embittered  by  the  per- 
secution to  which  his  faith  had  been  subjected.  He  was  a  man  of  a 
calm  and  judicial  mind,  and  his  judgment  is  rarely  biassed,  even  when 
he  touches  upon  ecclesiastical  matters  which,  however,  he  rarely  does. 

Valentinian  was  especially  remarkable  during  his  reign  for 
his  moderation  in  this  particular — that  he  kept  a  middle  course 
between  the  different  sects  of  religion,  and  never  troubled 
any  one,  nor  issued  any  orders  in  favor  of  one  kind  of  worship 
rather  than  another;  nor  did  he  promulgate  any  threatening 
edicts  to  bow  down  the  necks  of  his  subjects  to  the  form  of 
worship  to  which  he  himself  was  inclined;  but  he  left  these 
parties  just  as  he  found  them,  without  making  any  alterations. 

(b)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XII,  i,  75;  A.  D.  371. 

In  this  edict  Valentinian  I  confirms  the  immunities  of  the  heathen 
priesthood  which  had  been  restored  by  Julian.  The  heathen  priest- 
hood is  here  shown  to  continue  as  still  open  to  aspirants  after  political 
honors  and  conferring  immunities  upon  those  who  attained  it.  The 
curial  had  to  pass  through  the  various  offices  in  fixed  order  before  he 
attained  release  from  burdens  which  had  been  laid  upon  him  by  the 
State's  system  of  taxation. 

Let  those  be  held  as  enjoying  immunity  who,  advancing 
by  the  various  grades  and  in  due  order,  have  performed  their 
various  obHgations  and  have  attained  by  their  labor  and  ap- 
proved actions  to  the  priesthood  of  a  province  or  to  the  honor 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  339 

of  a  chief  magistracy,  gaining  this  position  not  by  favor  and 
votes  obtained  by  begging  for  them,  but  with  the  favorable 
report  of  the  citizens  and  commendation  of  the  public  as  a 
whole,  and  let  them  enjoy  the  repose  which  they  shall  have 
deserved  by  their  long  labor,  and  let  them  not  be  subject  to 
those  acts  of  bodily  severity  in  punishment  which  it  is  not 
seemly  that  honor ati  should  undergo. 

{c)  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  21;  V,  20.     (MSG,  82  :  1181.) 

The  following  statement  of  Theodoret  might  seem  to  have  been  in- 
spired by  the  general  hatred  which  was  felt  for  the  violent  persecutor 
and  pronounced  Arian,  Valens.  Nevertheless  the  statement  is  sup- 
ported by  references  to  the  conditions  under  Valens  made  by  Libanius 
in  his  Oratio  pro  Templis,  addressed  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius. 

IV,  21.  At  Antioch  Valens  spent  considerable  time,  and 
gave  complete  license  to  all  who  under  cover  of  the  Christian 
name,  pagans,  Jews,  and  the  rest  preached  doctrines  contrary 
to  those  of  the  Gospel .  The  slaves  of  this  error  even  went  so 
far  as  to  perform  pagan  rites,  and  thus  the  deceitful  fire  which 
after  Julian  had  been  quenched  by  Jovian,  was  now  rekin- 
dled by  permission  of  Valens.  The  rites  of  the  Jews,  of  Dio- 
nysus and  Demeter  were  no  longer  performed  in  a  corner  as 
they  would  have  been  in  a  pious  reign,  but  by  revellers  run- 
ning wild  in  the  forum.  Valens  was  a  foe  to  none  but  to 
them  that  held  the  apostolic  doctrine. 

V,  20.  Against  the  champions  of  the  apostolic  decrees 
alone  he  persisted  in  waging  war.  Accordingly,  during  the 
whole  period  of  his  reign  the  altar  fire  was  lit,  libations  and 
sacrifices  were  offered  to  idols,  pubhc  feasts  were  celebrated 
in  the  forum,  and  votaries  initiated  in  the  orgies  of  Dionysus 
ran  about  in  goatskins,  mangling  dogs  in  Bacchic  frenzy. 

{d)  Symmachus,  Memorial  to  Valentinian  II;  Ambrose, 
Epistula  17.     (MSL,  16  :  1007.) 

A  petition  for  the  restoration  of  the  altar  of  Victory  in  the  Senate 
House  at  Rome. 

Symmachus,  prefect  of  the  city,  had  previously  appealed  to  Gratian 


340  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

to  restore  the  altar  which  had  been  removed.  The  following  petition, 
of  which  the  more  impressive  parts  are  given,  was  made  in  384,  two 
years  after  the  first  petition.  The  opening  paragraph  refers  to  the 
former  petition.  The  memorial  is  found  among  the  Epistles  of  Am- 
brose, who  replies  to  it. 

I.  As  soon  as  the  most  honorable  Senate,  always  devoted 
to  you,  knew  what  crimes  were  made  amenable  to  law,  and 
saw  that  the  reputation  of  late  times  was  being  purified  by 
pious  princes,  following  the  example  of  a  favorable  time,  it 
gave  utterance  to  its  long-suppressed  grief  and  bade  me  be 
once  again  the  delegate  to  utter  its  complaints.  But  through 
wicked  men  audience  was  refused  me  by  the  divine  Emperor, 
otherwise  justice  would  not  have  been  wanting,  my  lords  and 
emperors  of  great  renown,  Valentinian,  Theodosius,  and  Ar- 
cadius,  victorious,  triumphant,  and  ever  august. 

3.  It  is  our  task  to  watch  on  behalf  of  your  clemency. 
For  by  what  is  it  more  suitable  that  we  defend  the  institutions 
of  our  ancestors,  and  the  rights  and  destiny  of  our  country, 
than  by  the  glory  of  these  times,  which  is  all  the  greater  when 
you  understand  that  you  may  not  do  anything  contrary  to 
the  custom  of  your  ancestors?  We  request,  then,  the  restora- 
tion of  that  condition  of  religious  affairs  which  was  so  long  of 
advantage  to  the  State.  Let  the  rulers  of  each  sect  and  of 
each  opinion  be  counted  up;  a  late  one  [Julian]  practised  the 
ceremonies  of  his  ancestors,  a  later  [Valentinian  I],  did  not 
abolish  them.  If  the  religion  of  old  times  does  not  make  a 
precedent,  let  the  connivance  of  the  last  [Valentinian  and 
Valens]  do  so. 

4.  Who  is  so  friendly  with  the  barbarians  as  not  to  require 
an  altar  of  Victory?  .  . 

5.  But  even  if  the  avoidance  of  such  an  omen^  were  not 
sufficient,  it  would  at  least  have  been  seemly  to  abstain  from 
injuring  the  ornaments  of  the  Senate  House.  Allow  us,  we 
beseech  you,  as  old  men  to  leave  to  posterity  what  we  received 
as  boys.    The  love  of  custom  is  great.    Justly  did  the  act  of 

^  As  the  destruction  of  the  altar  of  Victory. 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  341 

the  divine  Constantius  last  for  a  short  time.  All  precedents 
ought  to  be  avoided  by  you,  which  you  know  were  soon 
aboHshed.^  .  .  . 

6.  Where  shall  we  swear  to  obey  your  laws  and  com- 
mands? By  what  rehgious  sanctions  shall  the  false  mind  be 
terrified,  so  as  not  to  lie  in  bearing  witness?  All  things  are, 
indeed,  filled  with  God,  and  no  place  is  safe  for  the  perjured, 
but  to  be  bound  in  the  very  presence  of  rehgious  forms  has 
great  power  in  producing  a  fear  of  sinning.  That  altar  pre- 
serves the  concord  of  all;  that  altar  appeals  to  the  good  faith 
of  each;  and  nothing  gives  more  authority  to  our  decrees  than 
that  our  order  issues  every  decree  as  if  we  were  under  the 
sanction  of  an  oath.  So  that  a  place  will  be  opened  to  per- 
jury, and  my  illustrious  princes,  who  are  defended  by  a  pub- 
lic oath,  will  deem  this  to  be  such. 

7.  But  the  divine  Constantius  is  said  to  have  done  the 
same.  Let  us  rather  imitate  the  other  actions  of  that  prince 
[Valentinian  I],  who  would  have  undertaken  nothing  of  the 
kind,  if  any  one  else  had  committed  such  an  error  before  him. 
For  the  fall  of  the  earlier  sets  his  successor  right,  and  amend- 
ment results  from  the  censure  of  a  previous  example.  It  was 
pardonable  for  your  clemency's  ancestor  in  so  novel  a  matter 
not  to  guard  against  blame.  Can  the  same  excuse  avail  us, 
if  we  imitate  what  we  know  to  have  been  disapproved? 

8.  Will  your  majesties  hsten  to  other  actions  of  this  same 
prince,  which  you  may  more  worthily  imitate?  He  dimin- 
ished none  of  the  privileges  of  the  sacred  virgins,  he  filled  the 
priestly  offices  with  nobles.  He  did  not  refuse  the  cost  of 
the  Roman  ceremonies,  and  following  the  rejoicing  Senate 
through  all  the  streets  of  the  Eternal  City,  he  beheld  the 
shrines  with  unmoved  countenance,  he  read  the  names  of  the 
gods  inscribed  on  the  pediments,  he  inquired  about  the  origin 
of  the  temples,  and  expressed  admiration  for  their  founders. 
Although  he  himself  followed  another  religion,  he  maintained 
these  for  the  Empire,  for  every  one  has  his  own  customs, 

^  /.  e.,  by  Julian  and  Valentinian. 


342  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

every  one  his  own  rites.  The  divine  Mind  has  distributed 
different  guardians  and  different  cults  to  different  cities.  As 
souls  are  separately  given  to  infants  as  they  are  born,  so  to 
a  people  is  given  the  genius  of  its  destiny.  Here  comes  in 
the  proof  from  advantage,  which  most  of  all  vouches  to  man 
for  the  gods.  For,  since  our  reason  is  wholly  clouded,  whence 
does  the  knowledge  of  the  gods  more  rightly  come  to  us,  than 
from  the  memory  and  records  of  successful  affairs?  Now  if 
a  long  period  gives  authority  to  reHgious  customs,  faith  ought 
to  be  kept  with  so  many  centuries,  and  our  ancestors  ought 
to  be  followed  by  us  as  they  happily  followed  theirs. 

9.  Let  us  now  suppose  that  we  are  present  at  Rome  and 
that  she  addresses  you  in  these  words:  ^'Excellent  princes, 
fathers  of  your  country,  respect  my  years  to  which  pious 
rites  have  brought  me.  Let  me  use  the  ancestral  ceremonies, 
for  I  do  not  repent  of  them.  Let  me  live  after  my  own  fash- 
ion, for  I  am  free.  This  worship  subdued  the  world  to  my 
laws,  these  sacred  rites  repelled  Hannibal  from  the  walls, 
and  the  Senones  from  the  capitol.  Have  I  been  reserved  for 
this,  that  when  aged  I  should  be  blamed?  I  will  consider 
what  it  is  thought  should  be  set  in  order,  but  tardy  and  dis- 
creditable is  the  reformation  of  old  age." 

10.  We  ask,  therefore,  peace  for  the  gods  of  our  fathers 
and  of  our  country.  It  is  just  that  what  all  worship  be  con- 
sidered one.  We  look  on  the  same  stars,  the  sky  is  common, 
the  same  world  surrounds  us.  What  difference  does  it  make 
by  what  paths  each  seeks  the  truth?  We  cannot  attain  to 
so  great  a  secret  by  one  road;  but  this  discussion  is  rather 
for  persons  at  ease;  we  offer  now  prayers,  not  conflict.^ 

(e)  Ambrose,  Epistula  18.     (MSL,  16  :  1013.) 

Reply  of  Ambrose  to  the  Memorial  of  Symmachus. 

Immediately  after  the  receipt  of  the  Memorial  of  Symmachus  by 
Valentinian  II,  a  copy  was  sent  to  Ambrose,  who  wrote  a  reply  or  let- 
ter of  advice  to  Valentinian,  which  might  be  regarded  as  a  counter- 

1  The  rest  of  the  petition  is  taken  up  chiefly  with  a  protest  against  the  con- 
fiscation of  the  endowments  for  the  vestal  virgins. 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  343 

petition.  In  it  he  enters  upon  the  arguments  of  Symmachus.  Al- 
though he  could  not  present  the  same  pathetic  figure  of  an  old  man 
pleading  for  the  religion  of  his  ancestors,  his  arguments  are  not  unjust, 
and  dispose  satisfactorily  of  the  leading  points  made  by  Symmachus. 
The  line  of  reasoning  represents  the  best  Christian  opinion  of  the  times 
on  the  matter  of  the  relation  of  the  State  to  heathenism. 

3.  The  illustrious  prefect  of  the  city  has  in  a  memorial 
set  forth  three  propositions  which  he  considers  of  force — that 
Rome,  he  says,  asks  for  her  rites  again,  that  pay  be  given  to 
her  priests  and  vestal  virgins,  and  that  a  general  famine  fol- 
lowed upon  the  refusal  of  the  priests'  stipends.  .  .  . 

7.  Let  the  invidious  complaints  of  the  Roman  people 
come  to  an  end.  Rome  has  given  no  such  charge.  She 
speaks  other  words.  ''Why  do  you  daily  stain  me  with  the 
useless  blood  of  the  harmless  herd?  Trophies  of  victory  de- 
pend not  upon  the  entrails  of  the  flock,  but  on  the  strength 
of  those  who  fight.  I  subdued  the  world  by  a  different  dis- 
cipline. Camillus  was  my  soldier  who  slew  those  who  had 
taken  the  Tarpeian  rock,  and  brought  back  to  the  capitol  the 
standards  taken  away;  valor  laid  low  those  whom  religion 
had  not  driven  off.  .  .  .  Why  do  you  bring  forward  the  rites 
of  our  ancestors?  I  hate  the  rites  of  Neros.  Why  should 
I  speak  of  emperors  of  two  months,^  and  the  ends  of  rulers 
closely  joined  to  their  commencements.  Or  is  it,  perchance, 
a  new  thing  for  barbarians  to  cross  their  boundaries?  Were 
they,  too.  Christians  whose  wretched  and  unprecedented 
cases,  the  one  a  captive  emperor^  and  under  the  other^  the 
captive  world,^  made  manifest  that  their  rites  which  prom- 
ised victory  were  false?  Was  there  then  no  altar  of  Vic- 
tory? .  .  . 

8.  By  one  road,  says  he,  one  cannot  attain  to  so  great  a 
secret.  What  you  know  not,  that  we  know  by  the  voice  of 
God.     And  what  you  seek  by  fancies  we  have  found  out  from 

^  Allusion  to  the  very  brief  reign  of  several. 

2  Valerian  taken  captive  by  Sapor.  '  Galienus. 

^  Reference  to  the  ''  thirty  tyrants." 


344  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

the  very  wisdom  and  truth  of  God.  Your  ways,  therefore, 
do  not  agree  with  ours.  You  implore  peace  for  your  gods 
from  the  Eniperor,  we  ask  peace  for  our  emperors  themselves 
from  Christ.  .  .  . 

10.  But,  says  he,  let  the  ancient  altars  be  restored  to  their 
images,  and  their  ornaments  to  the  shrines.  Let  this  demand 
be  made  of  one  who  shares  in  their  superstitions;  a  Christian 
emperor  has  learned  to  honor  the  altar  of  Christ  alone.  .  .  . 
Has  any  heathen  emperor  raised  an  altar  to  Christ?  While 
they  demand  the  restoration  of  things  which  have  been,  by 
their  own  example  they  show  us  how  great  reverence  Christian 
emperors  ought  to  pay  to  the  rehgion  which  they  follow, 
since  heathen  ones  offered  all  to  their  superstitions. 

We  began  long  since,  and  now  they  follow  those  whom  they 
excluded.  We  glory  in  yielding  our  blood,  an  expense  moves 
them.  .  .  .  We  have  increased  through  loss,  through  want, 
through  punishment;  they  do  not  believe  that  their  rites 
can  continue  without  contribution. 

11.  Let  the  vestal  virgins,  he  says,  retain  their  privileges. 
Let  those  speak  thus  who  are  unable  to  believe  that  virginity 
can  exist  without  reward,  let  those  who  do  not  trust  virtue, 
encourage  it  by  gain.  But  how  many  virgins  have  their  prom- 
ised rewards  gained  for  them?  Hardly  are  seven  vestal  vir- 
gins received.  See  the  whole  number  whom  the  fillet  and 
chaplets  for  the  head,  the  robes  of  purple  dye,  the  pomp  of 
the  litter  surrounded  by  a  company  of  attendants,  the  great- 
est privileges,  immense  profits,  and  a  prescribed  time  for  vir- 
ginity have  gathered  together. 

12.  Let  them  Kft  up  the  eyes  of  soul  and  body,  let  them 
look  upon  a  people  of  modesty,  a  people  of  purity,  an  assem- 
bly of  virginity.  Not  fillets  are  the  ornament  of  their  heads, 
but  a  veil  common  in  use  but  ennobled  by  chastity;  the  en- 
ticement of  beauty  not  sought  out,  but  laid  aside;  none  of 
those  purple  insignia,  no  delicious  luxuries,  but  the  practice 
of  fasts;  no  privileges,  no  gains;  all  other  things,  in  fine,  of 
such  a  kind  that  one  would  think  them  restrained  from  desire 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  345 

whilst  practising  their  duties.  But  whilst  the  duty  is  being 
practised  the  desire  for  it  is  aroused.  Chastity  is  increased 
by  its  own  sacrifice.  That  is  not  virginity  which  is  bought 
with  a  price,  and  not  kept  through  a  desire  for  virtue;  that 
is  not  purity  which  is  bought  by  auction  for  money  or  which 
is  bid  for  a  time. 

16.  No  one  has  denied  gifts  to  shrines  and  legacies  to 
soothsayers;  their  land  only  has  been  taken  away,  because 
they  did  not  use  reHgiously  that  which  they  claimed  in  right 
of  rehgion.  Why  did  not  they  who  allege  our  example  prac- 
tise what  we  did?  The  Church  has  no  possessions  of  her] 
own  except  the  faith.  Hence  are  her  returns,  her  increase.; 
The  possessions  of  the  Church  are  the  maintenance  of  the 
poor.  Let  them  count  up  how  many  captives  the  temples 
have  ransomed,  what  food  they  have  contributed  for  the 
poor,  to  what  exiles  they  have  supplied  the  means  of  living. 
Their  lands,  then,  have  been  taken  away,  but  not  their  rights. 

23.  He  says  the  rites  of  our  ancestors  ought  to  be  retained. 
But  why,  seeing  that  all  things  have  made  a  progress  toward 
what  is  better?  .  .  .  The  day  shines  not  at  the  beginning, 
but  as  time  proceeds  it  is  bright  with  increase  of  light  and 
grows  warm  with  increase  of  heat. 

27.  We,  too,  inexperienced  in  age,  have  an  infancy  of  our 
senses,  but,  changing  as  years  go  by,  lay  aside  the  rudimentary 
conditions  of  our  faculties. 

28.  Let  them  say,  then,  that  all  things  ought  to  have  re- 
mained in  their  first  dark  beginnings ;  that  the  world  covered 
with  darkness  is  now  displeasing  because  it  has  brightened 
with  the  rising  of  the  sun.  And  how  much  more  pleasant 
is  it  to  have  dispelled  the  darkness  of  the  mind  than  that  of 
the  body,  and  that  the  rays  of  faith  should  have  shone  than 
that  of  the  sun.  So,  then,  the  primeval  state  of  the  world,  as 
of  all  things,  has  passed  away  that  the  venerable  old  age  of 
hoary  faith  might  follow.  .  .  . 

30.  If  the  old  rites  pleased,  why  did  Rome  also  take  up 
foreign  ones?     I  pass  over  the  ground  hidden  with  costly 


346  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

buildings,  and  shepherds'  cottages  ghttering  with  degenerate 
gold.  Why,  that  I  may  reply  to  the  very  matter  which  they 
complain  of,  have  they  eagerly  received  the  images  of  captured 
cities,  and  conquered  gods,  and  the  foreign  rites  of  alien 
superstition?  Whence,  then,  is  the  pattern  of  Cybele  washing 
her  chariots  in  a  stream  counterfeiting  the  Almo?  Whence 
were  the  Phrygian  prophets  and  the  deities  of  unjust  Carthage, 
always  hateful  to  the  Romans?  And  he  whom  the  Africans 
worship  as  Celestis,  the  Persians  as  Mithra,  and  the  greater 
number  as  Venus,  according  to  a  difference  of  name,  not  a 
variety  of  deities? 

3 1 .  They  ask  to  have  her  altar  erected  in  the  Senate  House 
of  the  city  of  Rome,  that  is  where  the  majority  who  meet 
together  are  Christians!  There  are  altars  in  all  the  temples, 
and  an  altar  also  in  the  Temple  of  Victory.  Since  they  de- 
light in  numbers,  they  celebrate  their  sacrifices  everywhere. 
To  claim  a  sacrifice  on  this  one  altar,  what  is  it  but  to  insult 
the  faith?  Is  it  to  be  borne  that  a  heathen  should  sacrifice 
and  a  Christian  be  present?  .  .  .  Shall  there  not  be  a  common 
lot  in  that  common  assembly?  The  faithful  portion  of  the 
Senate  will  be  bound  by  the  voices  of  those  who  call  upon  the 
gods,  by  the  oaths  of  those  who  swear  by  them.  If  they 
oppose  they  will  seem  to  exhibit  their  falsehood,  if  they  ac- 
quiesce, to  acknowledge  what  is  a  sacrilege. 

(/)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  lo,  12;  A.  D.  392. 

Decree  of  Theodosius  prohibiting  heathen  worship  as  a  crime  of  the 
same  character  as  treason. 

The  following  decree  may  be  said  to  have  permanently  forbidden 
heathenism,  at  least  in  the  East,  though  as  a  matter  of  fact  many 
heathen  not  only  continued  to  practise  their  rites  in  defiance  of  the  law 
or  with  the  connivance  of  the  authorities,  but  also  received  appoint- 
ments at  the  court  and  elsewhere.  The  law  was  never  repealed.  In 
course  of  time  heathenism  disappeared  as  a  religious  system. 

XVI,  10,  12.  Hereafter  no  one  of  whatever  race  or  dig- 
nity, whether  placed  in  office  or  discharged  therefrom  with 
honor,  powerful  by  birth  or  humble  in  condition  and  fortune, 


FROM  JOVIAN  TO  THEODOSIUS  347 

shall  in  any  place  or  in  any  city  sacrifice  an  innocent  victim 
to  a  senseless  image,  venerate  with  fire  the  household  deity 
by  a  more  private  offering,  as  it  were  the  genius  of  the  house, 
or  the  Penates,  and  burn  lights,  place  incense,  or  hang  up  gar- 
lands. If  any  one  undertakes  by  way  of  sacrifice  to  slay  a 
victim  or  to  consult  the  smoking  entrails,  let  him,  as  guilty 
of  lese-majesty,  receive  the  appropriate  sentence,  having  been 
accused  by  a  lawful  indictment,  even  though  he  shall  not  have 
sought  anything  against  the  safety  of  the  princes  or  concern- 
ing their  welfare.  It  constitutes  a  crime  of  this  nature  to 
wish  to  repeal  the  laws,  to  spy  into  unlawful  things,  to  reveal 
secrets,  or  to  attempt  things  forbidden,  to  seek  the  end  of 
another's  welfare,  or  to  promise  the  hope  of  another's  ruin. 
If  any  one  by  placing  incense  venerates  either  images  made 
by  mortal  labor,  or  those  which  are  enduring,  or  if  any  one 
in  ridiculous  fashion  forthwith  venerates  what  he  has  repre- 
sented, either  by  a  tree  encircled  with  garlands  or  an  altar 
of  cut  turfs,  though  the  advantage  of  such  service  is  small, 
the  injury  to  religion  is  complete,  let  him  as  guilty  of  sacrilege 
be  punished  by  the  loss  of  that  house  or  possession  in  which 
he  worshipped  according  to  the  heathen  superstition.  For  all 
places  which  shall  smoke  with  incense,  if  they  shall  be  proved 
to  belong  to  those  who  burn  the  incense,  shall  be  confiscated. 
But  if  in  temples  or  public  sanctuaries  or  buildings  and  fields 
belonging  to  another,  any  one  should  venture  this  sort  of 
sacrifice,  if  it  shall  appear  that  the  acts  were  performed  with- 
out the  knowledge  of  the  owner,  let  him  be  compelled  to  pay 
a  fine  of  twenty-five  pounds  of  gold,  and  let  the  same  penalty 
apply  to  those  who  connive  at  this  crime  as  well  as  those 
who  sacrifice.  We  will,  also,  that  this  command  be  observed 
by  judges,  defensors,  and  curials  of  each  and  every  city,  to 
the  effect  that  those  things  noted  by  them  be  reported  to  the 
court,  and  by  them  the  acts  charged  may  be  punished.  But 
if  they  believe  anything  is  to  be  overlooked  by  favor  or  al- 
lowed to  pass  through  negligence,  they  will  lie  under  a  judicial 
warning.     And  when  they  have  been  warned,  if  by  any  neg- 


348  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

ligence  they  fail  to  punish  they  will  be  fined  thirty  pounds 
of  gold,  and  the  members  of  their  court  are  to  be  subjected  to 
a  like  punishment. 


§  70.    The  Dogmatic  Parties  and  Their  Mutual 
Relations 

The  parties  in  the  Arian  controversy  became  greatly  divided 
in  the  course  of  the  conflict.  Speaking  broadly,  there  were 
still  two  groups,  of  which  one  was  composed  of  all  those  who 
regarded  the  Son  as  a  creature  and  so  not  eternal  and  not 
truly  God;  and  the  other,  of  those  who  regarded  Him  as  un- 
created and  in  some  real  sense  eternal  and  truly  God,  yet 
without  denying  the  unity  of  God.  The  former  were  the 
various  Arian  parties  tending  to  constant  division.  The  lat- 
ter can  hardly  yet  be  comprised  under  one  common  name, 
and  might  be  called  the  anti-Arian  parties,  were  it  not  that 
there  was  a  positive  content  to  their  faith  which  was  in  far 
better  harmony  with  the  prevailing  religious  sentiment  of 
the  East  and  was  constantly  receiving  accessions.  In  the 
second  generation  after  Nicaea,  a  new  group  of  theologians 
came  to  the  front,  of  whom  the  most  important  were  Eus- 
tathius  of  Sebaste,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  three  Cappado- 
cians,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianus,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  most 
of  whom  had  at  least  sympathized  with  the  Homoiousian 
party.  Already  at  the  synod  of  Ancyra,  in  358,  an  approach 
was  made  toward  a  reconcihation  of  the  anti-Arian  factions, 
in  that,  by  a  more  careful  definition,  homoousios  was  rejected 
only  in  the  sense  of  identity  of  being,  and  homoiousios  was 
asserted  only  in  the  sense  of  equality  of  attributes  in  the  not 
identical  subjects  which,  however,  shared  in  the  same  essence. 
Homoiousios  did  not  mean  mere  similarity  of  being.  (Ana- 
themas in  Hahn,  §  162;  Hefele,  §  80.)  The  line  of  develop- 
ment ultimately  taken  was  by  a  precise  distinction  between 
hypostasis  and  ousia,  whereby  hypostasis,  which  never  meant 
person  in  the  modern  sense,  which  later  is  represented  by  the 


THE  DOGMATIC  PARTIES  349 

Greek  prosopon,  was  that  which  subsists  and   shares  with 
other  hypostases  in  a  common  essence  or  ousia. 

Additional  source  material:  Athanasius,  De  Synodis  (PNF);  Basil, 
Epp.  7,d>,  52,  69,  125  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  VIII);  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  De 
Synodis,  cc.  87-91  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  IX);  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  25. 

Council  of  Alexandria  A.  D.  362.  Tomus  ad  Antiochenos.. 
(MSG,  26  :  797.) 

The  Council  of  Alexandria,  A.  D.  362,  was  held  by  Athanasius  in  the 
short  time  he  was  allowed  to  be  in  his  see  city  at  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Julian.  In  the  synodal  letter  or  tome  addressed  to  the  Nicene 
Christians  at  Antioch  we  have  the  foundation  of  the  ultimate  formula 
of  the  Church  as  opposing  Arianism,  one  substance  and  three  persons, 
one  ousia  and  three  hypostases.  The  occasion  of  the  letter  was  an  at- 
tempt to  win  over  the  Meletian  party  in  the  schism  among  the  anti- 
Arians  of  Antioch.  Meletius  and  his  followers  appear  to  have  been 
Homoiousians  who  were  strongly  inclined  to  accept  the  Nicene  confes- 
sion. Their  church  was  in  the  Old  Town,  a  portion  of  Antioch.  Op- 
posed to  them  was  Paulinus  with  his  party,  which  held  firmly  to  the 
Nicene  confession.  The  difficulty  in  the  way  of  a  full  recognition  of 
the  Nicene  statement  by  Meletius  and  his  followers  was  that  it  savored 
of  Sabellianism.  The  difficulty  of  the  party  of  PauHnus  in  recognizing 
the  orthodoxy  of  the  Meletians  was  their  practice  of  speaking  of  the 
three  hypostases  or  subsistences,  which  was  condemned  by  the  words 
of  the  Nicene  definition.^  The  outcome  of  the  Alexandrian  Council  in 
the  matter  was  that  a  distinction  could  be  made  between  ousia  and  hy- 
postasis, that  the  difference  between  the  parties  was  largely  a  matter  of 
terminology,  that  those  who  could  use  the  Nicene  symbol  with  the  under- 
standing that  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  a  creature  and  was  not  separate 
from  the  essence  of  Christ  should  be  regarded  as  orthodox.  Out  of 
this  understanding  came  the  "New  Nicene"  party,  of  which  the  first 
might  be  said  to  have  been  Meletius,  who  accepted  homoousios  in  the 
sense  of  homoiousios,  and  of  which  the  "three  great  Cappadocians " 
became  the  recognized  leaders. 

The  Council  of  Alexandria,  in  addition  to  condemning  the  Macedo- 
nian heresy,  in  advance  of  Constantinople,  also  anticipated  that  assem- 
bly by  condemning  x\pollinarianism  without  mentioning  the  teacher 
by  whom  the  heresy  was  taught.  It  is  condemned  in  the  seventh  sec- 
tion of  the  tome. 

§  3.  As  many,  then,  as  desire  peace  with  us,  and  especially 
those  who  assemble  in  the  Old  Town,  and  those  again  who 
are  seceding  from  the  Arians,  do  ye  call  to  yourselves,  and 

1  V.  supra,  §  63. 


350  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

receive  them  as  parents  their  sons,  and  as  tutors  and  guardians 
welcome  them;  and  unite  them  to  our  beloved  Paulinus  and 
his  people,  without  requiring  more  from  them  than  to  anathe- 
matize the  Arian  heresy  and  confess  the  faith  confessed  by  the 
holy  Fathers  at  Nicaea  and  to  anathematize  also  those  who 
say  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  a  creature  and  separate  from  the 
essence  of  Christ.  For  this  is  in  truth  a  complete  renunciation 
of  the  abominable  heresy  of  the  Arians,  to  refuse  to  divide 
the  Holy  Trinity,  or  to  say  that  any  part  of  it  is  a  creature. 

§  5.  ...  As  to  those  whom  some  were  blaming  for  speak- 
ing of  three  subsistences  (hypostases),  on  the  ground  that  the 
phrase  is  unscriptural  and  therefore  suspicious,  we  thought 
it  right,  indeed,  to  require  nothing  beyond  the  confession  of 
Nicaea,  but  on  account  of  the  contention  we  made  inquiry  of 
them,  whether  they  meant,  like  the  Arian  madmen,  subsist- 
ences foreign  and  strange  and  alien  in  essence  from  one 
another,  and  that  each  subsistence  was  divided  apart  by  it- 
self, as  is  the  case  with  other  creatures  in  general  and  those 
begotten  of  men,  or  like  substances,  such  as  gold,  silver,  or 
brass;  or  whether,  like  other  heretics,  they  meant  three  begin- 
nings and  three  Gods,  by  speaking  of  three  subsistences. 

They  assured  us  in  reply  that  they  neither  meant  this  nor 
had  ever  held  it.  But  upon  our  asking  them  "what,  then, 
do  you  mean  by  it,  or  why  do  you  use  such  expressions?  "  they 
replied:  Because  they  believe  in  a  Holy  Trinity,  not  a  trinity 
in  name  only,  but  existing  and  subsisting  in  truth,  both 
Father  truly  existing  and  subsisting,  and  a  Son,  truly  sub- 
stantial and  subsisting,  and  a  Holy  Ghost  subsisting  and 
really  existing  do  we  acknowledge,  said  they,  and  that  neither 
had  they  said  there  were  three  Gods  or  three  beginnings, 
nor  would  they  at  all  tolerate  such  as  said  or  held  so,  but  that 
they  acknowledged  a  Holy  Trinity,  but  one  Godhead  and  one 
beginning,  and  that  the  Son  is  co-essential  with  the  Father, 
as  the  Fathers  said;  and  the  Holy  Ghost  not  a  creature, 
nor  external,  but  proper  to,  and  inseparable  from,  the  essence 
of  the  Father  and  the  Son. 


THE   DOGMATIC   PARTIES  351 

§  6.  Having  accepted,  then,  these  men's  interpretation  of 
their  language  and  their  defence,  we  made  inquiry  of  those 
blamed  by  them  for  speaking  of  one  subsistence,  whether 
they  use  the  expression  in  the  sense  of  Sabellius,  to  the  nega- 
tion of  the  Son  and  Holy  Ghost,  or  as  though  the  Son  was 
non-substantial,  or  the  Holy  Ghost  without  subsistence.  But 
they  in  their  turn  assured  us  that  they  neither  said  this  nor 
had  ever  held  it,  but,  ''we  use  the  word  subsistence  thinking  it 
the  same  thing  to  say  subsistence  or  essence."  ^  But  we  hold 
there  is  One,  because  the  Son  is  of  the  essence  of  the  Father 
and  because  of  the  identity  of  nature.  For  we  believe  that 
there  is  one  Godhead,  and  that  the  nature  of  it  is  one,  and 
not  that  there  is  one  nature  of  the  Father,  from  which  that 
of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  are  distinct.  Well,  there- 
upon, they  who  had  been  blamed  for  saying  that  there  were 
three  subsistences  agreed  with  the  others,  while  those  who 
had  spoken  of  one  essence,  also  confessed  the  doctrine  of  the 
former  as  interpreted  by  them.  And  by  both  sides  Arius 
was  anathematized  as  an  adversary  of  Christ,  and  Sabellius, 
and  Paul  of  Samosata  as  impious  men,  and  Valentinus  and 
Basihdes  as  aliens  from  the  truth,  and  Manichasus  as  an  in- 
ventor of  mischief.  And  all,  by  God's  grace,  and  after  the 
above  explanations,  agreed  together  that  the  faith  confessed 
by  the  Fathers  at  Nicaea  is  better  and  more  accurate  than  the 
said  phrases,  and  that  for  the  future  they  would  prefer  to  be 
content  to  use  its  language. 

§  7.  But  since,  also,  certain  seemed  to  be  contending  to- 
gether concerning  the  fleshly  economy  of  the  Saviour,  we 
inquired  of  both  parties.  And  what  the  one  confessed  the 
others  also  agreed  to:  that  not  as  when  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  the  prophets,  did  it  dwell  in  a  holy  man  at  the  con- 
summation of  the  ages,  but  that  the  Word  himself  was  made 
flesh;  and  being  in  the  form  of  God,  He  took  the  form  of  a 
servant,  and  from  Mary  after  the  flesh  became  man  for  us, 
and  that  thus  in  Him  the  human  race  is  perfectly  and  wholly 

^  Hypostasis  or  ousia;  cj.  the  Nicene  definition,  §  63,  g. 


352  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

delivered  from  sin  and  made  alive  from  the  dead,  and  led 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  For  they  also  confess  that  the 
Saviour  had  not  a  body  without  a  soul,  nor  without  sense  or 
intelligence;  ^  for  it  was  not  possible,  when  the  Lord  had  be- 
come man  for  us,  that  His  body  should  be  without  intelK- 
gence;'  nor  was  the  salvation,  effected  in  the  Word  himself, 
a  salvation  of  the  body  only,  but  of  the  soul  also.  And 
being  Son  of  God  in  truth,  He  became  also  Son  of  Man;  and 
being  God's  only  begotten  Son,  He  became  also  at  the  same 
time  "first-born  among  many  brethren."  Wherefore  neither 
was  there  one  Son  of  God  before  Abraham,  another  after 
Abraham:  nor  was  there  one  that  raised  up  Lazarus,  another 
that  asked  concerning  him;  but  the  same  it  was  that  said  as 
man,  "Where  does  Lazarus  lie?"  and  as  God  raised  him  up; 
the  same  that  as  man  and  in  the  body  spat,  but  divinely 
as  Son  of  God  opened  the  eyes  of  the  man  blind  from  his 
birth;  and  while,  as  Peter  says,  in  the  flesh  He  suffered,  as 
God  He  opened  the  tomb  and  raised  the  dead.  For  which  rea- 
sons, thus  understanding  all  that  is  said  in  the  Gospel,  they 
assured  us  that  they  held  the  same  truth  about  the  Word's 
incarnation  and  becoming  man.  ^ 

§71.  The  Emperor  Theodosius  and  the  Triumph  of 
THE  New  Nicene  Orthodoxy  at  the  Council  of 
Constantinople  A.  D.  381 

The  Emperor  Theodosius  was  appointed  colleague  of 
Gratian  and  Valentinian  II,  378.  He  issued  in  conjunction 
with  these  emperors  an  edict  {Cod.  Theod.j  XVI,  i,  2;  cf. 
Cod.  Just.,  I,  I,  I,  V.  infra,  §  72,  B,  e),  requiring  all  subjects 
of  the  Empire  to  hold  the  orthodox  faith  in  the  Trinity.  He 
then  called  a  council  of  Eastern  bishops  to  meet  at  Constan- 
tinople in  381  to  settle  the  question  as  to  the  succession  to 
the  see  of  that  city  and  to  confirm  the  creed  of  Nicaea  as  the 
faith  of  the  Eastern  half  of  the  Church.     Gregory  of  Nazianus 

^  The  ApoUinarian  heresy. 


THE  EMPEROR  THEODOSIUS  353 

was  appointed  bishop  of  Constantinople,  but  was  forced  to 
resign,  having  formerly  been  bishop  of  Sasima,  from  which 
he  had  been  translated  in  violation  of  the  Nicene  canons. 
As  soon  as  it  was  apparent  that  the  bishops  would  have  to 
accept  the  Nicene  faith  the  thirty-six  Macedonians  withdrew. 
Their  opinion  as  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  He  was  not  divine 
in  the  same  sense  that  the  Son  was  divine,  was  condemned, 
without  express  statement  of  the  point  condemned,  as  was 
also  the  teaching  of  Apollinaris  as  to  the  nature  of  Christ. 
The  council  was  not  intended  to  be  an  ecumenical  or  general 
council,  and  it  was  not  regarded  as  such  even  in  the  East 
imtil  after  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  and  then 
probably  on  account  of  the  creed  which  was  then  falsely 
attributed  to  the  Fathers  of  Constantinople.  In  the  West 
the  council  was  not  recognized  as  an  ecumenical  council  until 
well  into  the  sixth  century.  (See  Hefele,  §  100.)  The  council 
issued  no  creed  and  made  no  additions  to  the  Nicene  creed. 
It  pubHshed  a  tome,  since  lost,  setting  forth  the  faith  in  the 
Trinity.  It  enacted  four  canons,  of  which  only  the  first  three 
are  of  general  application. 

Additional  source  material:  Percival,  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils 
(PNF);  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  6-9;  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  8;  Basil, 
De  Spiritu  Sancto  (PNF),  Hefele,  §§  95-100. 

{a)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381,  Canons j  Bruns, 
I,  20.     CJ.  Kirch,  nn.  583  /. 

The  text  of  the  canons  of  the  council  may  be  found  in  Hefele,  §  98, 
and  also  in  Bruns.  The  Translations  and  Reprints  of  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania  give  translations.  For  the  address  of  the  council  to 
Theodosius,  see  §  72,  5.  The  fourth  canon  is  of  a  merely  temporary 
importance. 

Canon  i.  The  faith  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen 
Fathers  who  were  assembled  at  Nicaea  in  Bithynia  shall  not 
be  set  aside  but  shall  remain  dominant.  And  every  heresy 
shall  be  anathematized,  especially  that  of  the  Eunomians  or 
Anomoeans,   the  Arians   or   Eudoxians,   the  semi-Arians  or 


354  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

Pneumatomachians,  the  Sabellians,  Marcellians,  Photinians, 
and  Apollinarians. 

Canon  2.  The  bishops  are  not  to  go  beyond  their  dioceses 
to  churches  lying  outside  of  their  bounds,  nor  bring  confusion 
on  churches;  but  let  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  according 
to  the  canons,  alone  administer  the  affairs  of  Egypt;  and  let 
the  bishops  of  the  East  manage  the  East  alone,  the  privileges 
of  the  church  in  Antioch,  which  are  mentioned  in  the  canons 
of  Nicaea,  being  preserved;  and  let  the  bishops  of  the  Asian 
diocese  administer  the  Asian  affairs  only;  and  the  Pontic 
bishops  only  Pontic  matters;  and  the  Thracian  bishops  only 
Thracian  matters.  And  let  not  the  bishops  go  beyond  their 
dioceses  for  ordination  or  any  other  ecclesiastical  ministrations, 
unless  they  be  invited.  And  the  aforesaid  canon  concerning 
dioceses  being  observed,  it  is  evident  that  the  synod  of  each 
province  will  administer  the  affairs  of  that  particular  province 
as  was  decreed  at  Nicaea.  But  the  churches  of  God  in  heathen 
nations  must  be  governed  according  to  the  custom  which  has 
prevailed  from  the  time  of  the  Fathers. 

Canon  3.  The  bishop  of  Constantinople,  however,  shall 
have  the  prerogative  of  honor  after^  the  bishop  of  Rome; 
because  Constantinople  is  New  Rome. 

{b)  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Creed.  {Cf,  MSG,  33 :  533.)  Cf. 
Hahn,  §  124. 

The  clauses  which  are  here  given  are  the  headings  of  the  sixth  to  the 
eighteenth  Catechetical  Lectures  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  in  which  the 
writer  expounded  the  baptismal  creed  of  Jerusalem.  This  creed  is 
approximately  reconstructed  by  bringing  together  the  headings.  Its 
date  is  circa  345.  It  should  be  compared  with  the  creed  of  the  church 
of  Salamis,  in  the  next  selection.  They  are  the  precursors  of  what  is 
now  known  as  the  Nicene  creed,  incorrectly  attributed  to  the  Coun- 
cil of  Constantinople  A.  D.  381. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of 
heaven  and  earth,  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible. 
And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  the  only 

*  /.  e.,  following. 


THE  EMPEROR  THEODOSIUS  355 

begotten,  begotten  of  the  Father,  true  God,  before  all  the 
ages,  through  whom  all  things  were  made; 

Incarnate  and  made  man;  crucified  and  buried; 

And  rose  again  the  third  day; 

And  ascended  into  heaven; 

And  sat  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father; 

And  shall  come  again  in  glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the 
dead,  of  whose  kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end. 

And  in  one  Holy  Ghost,  the  Paraclete,  who  spake  by  the 
prophets; 

And  in  one  baptism  of  repentance  for  remission  of  sins; 

And  in  one  holy  Catholic  Church; 

And  in  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh; 

And  in  the  life  eternal. 

(c)  Epiphanius,  Ancoratus,  chs.  119  /.  (MSG,  43  :  252.) 
Cf.  Hahn,  §  125. 

Epiphanius,  bishop  of  Salamis,  was  the  most  important  of  the 
hereseologists  of  the  Fathers,  gathering  to  form  his  work  on  heresies 
some  scores  of  heterodox  systems  of  teachings.  His  passion  for  ortho- 
doxy was  taken  advantage  of  by  Theophilus  of  Antioch  to  cause  trouble 
for  Chrysostom  and  others;  see  Origenistic  controversy,  §  87.  The 
Ancoratus,  from  which  the  following  creed  is  taken,  is  a  statement  of 
the  Catholic  faith  which,  amidst  the  storms  of  the  Arian  controversy, 
should  serve  as  an  anchor  of  salvation  for  the  Christians.  The  date 
of  the  following  creed,  which  has  come  to  be  known  as  the  Salaminium, 
is  374.     It  is  evidently  based  upon  that  of  Jerusalem  given  by  Cyril. 

We  believe  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty,  maker  of 
heaven  and  earth  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible. 

And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of 
God,  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all  worlds,  that  is,  of  the 
substance  of  the  Father,  light  of  light,  very  God  of  very 
God,  begotten,  not  made,  being  of  one  substance  [homoou- 
sios]  with  the  Father;  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  both 
those  in  heaven  and  those  on  earth;  who  for  us  men  and  for 
our  salvation  came  down  from  heaven  and  was  incarnate  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  was  made  man; 
He  was  crucified  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate^  and  suffered 


356  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

and  was  buried;  and  the  third  day  He  rose  again,  according 
to  the  Scriptures;  and  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sitteth  on 
the  right  hand  of  the  Father;  and  He  shall  come  again  in 
glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead;  of  whose  kingdom 
there  shall  be  no  end. 

And  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Lord  and  giver  of  life,  who  pro- 
ceedeth  from  the  Father,  who  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  to- 
gether is  worshipped  and  glorified,  who  spake  by  the  prophets ; 
and  in  one  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church;  we  acknowl- 
edge one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins;  and  we  look  for 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come. 

But  those  who  say  there  was  a  time  when  He  was  not,  and 
He  was  not  before  He  was  begotten,  or  He  was  made  of 
nothing,  or  of  another  substance  or  essence  [hypostasis  or 
ousia],  saying  that  the  Son  of  God  is  effluent  or  variable — 
these  the  CathoHc  and  Apostolic  Church  anathematizes. 

CHAPTER  IV.  THE  EMPIRE  AND  THE  IMPERIAL 
STATE  CHURCH 

In  the  period  extending  from  the  accession  of  Constantine 
(311  or  324)  to  the  death  of  Theodosius  the  Great  (395),  the 
characteristic  features  of  the  Church's  organization  took  defi- 
nite form,  and  its  relations  to  the  secular  authorities  and  the 
social  order  of  the  Empire  were  defined.  Its  constitution  with 
its  hierarchical  organization  of  clergy,  of  courts,  and  synods, 
together  with  its  intimate  union,  at  least  in  the  East,  with 
the  imperial  authority,  became  fixed  (§  72).  As  the  Church 
of  the  Empire,  it  was  under  the  control  and  patronage  of  the 
State;  all  other  forms  of  rehgion,  whether  pagan  or  Christian, 
schismatical  or  heretical,  were  severely  repressed  (§  73). 
The  Christian  clergy,  as  officials  in  this  State  Church,  became 
a  class  by  themselves  in  the  society  of  the  Empire,  not  only  as 
the  recipients  of  privileges,  but  as  having  special  functions 
in  the  administration  of  justice,  and  eventually  in  the  super- 
intendence of  secular  officials  and  secular  business  (§  74). 
By  degrees  the  Christian  spirit  influenced  the  spirit  of  the 


THE  EMPEROR  THEODOSIUS  357 

laws  and  the  popular  customs,  though  less  than  at  first  sight 
might  have  been  expected;  the  rigors  of  slavery  were  mit- 
igated and  cruel  gladiatorial  sports  abandoned  (§  75).  Mean- 
while popular  piety  was  by  no  means  raised  by  the  influx  of 
vast  numbers  of  heathen  into  the  Church;  bringing  with  them 
no  httle  of  their  previous  modes  of  thought  and  feehng,  and 
lacking  the  testing  of  faith  and  character  furnished  by  the 
persecutions,  they  lowered  the  general  moral  tone  of  the 
Church,  so  that  Christians  everywhere  were  affected  by  these 
ahen  ideas  and  feelings  (§  76).  The  Church,  however,  en- 
deavored to  raise  the  moral  tone  and  ideals  and  to  work 
effectively  in  society  by  care  for  the  poor  and  other  works 
of  benevolence,  and  in  its  regulation  of  marriage,  which  began 
in  this  period  to  be  a  favorite  subject  of  legislation  for  the 
Church's  councils  (§  76).  In  monasticism  this  striving  against 
the  lowering  forces  in  Christian  society  and  for  a  higher  type 
of  life  most  clearly  manifested  itself,  and,  beginning  in  Egypt, 
organized  forms  of  asceticism  spread  throughout  the  East 
and  toward  the  end  of  the  period  to  the  West  as  well  (§  78). 
But  monasticism  was  not  confined  to  the  private  ascetic. 
The  priesthood,  as  necessarily  presenting  an  example  of  higher 
moral  Hfe,  began  to  be  touched  by  the  ascetic  spirit,  and  in 
the  West  this  took  the  form  of  enforced  clerical  celibacy, 
though  the  custom  of  the  East  remained  far  less  rigorous 
(§  79).  In  presenting  these  lines  of  development,  it  is  at 
times  convenient  to  pass  beyond  the  exact  bounds  of  the 
period,  so  that  the  whole  subject  may  be  brought  together 
at  this  point  of  the  history. 

§  72.    The  Constitution  of  the  State  Church. 

§  73.    The  Sole  Authority  of  the  State  Church. 

§  74.     The  Position  of  the  Church  in  the  Social  Order  of 

the  Empire. 
§  75.     The  Social  Significance  of  the  State  Church. 
§  76.     Popular  Piety  and  the  Reception  of  Heathenism  in 

the  Church. 


358  THE   IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

§  77.     The    Extension    of    Monasticism    throughout    the 

Empire. 
§  78.     Influence    of    Ascetic    Ideals    within    the   Church: 

Clerical  Celibacy. 


§  72.    The  Constitution  of  the  State  Church 

The  Church's  constitution  received  its  permanent  form  in 
this  period.  The  conciliar  system  was  carried  to  its  logical 
completion  in  the  ecumenical  council  representing  the  entire 
Church  and  standing  at  the  head  of  a  system  which  included 
the  provincial  and  patriarchal  councils,  at  least  in  theory. 
The  clergy  were  organized  into  a  hierarchy  which  rested  upon 
the  basis  of  the  single  bishop  in  his  diocese,  who  had  under 
him  his  clergy,  and  culminated  in  the  patriarchs  placed  over 
the  great  divisions  of  the  State  Church,  corresponding  to  the 
primary  divisions  of  the  Empire.  The  Emperor  assumed  the 
supreme  authority  in  the  Church,  and  the  foundation  was  laid 
for  what  became  under  Justininian  Caesar opapism.  By  the 
institution  of  the  hierarchical  gradation  of  authority  and 
jurisdiction,  for  the  most  part  corresponding  to  the  pohtical 
and  administrative  divisions  of  the  Empire,  the  Church  both 
assumed  a  rigidly  organized  form  and  came  more  easily  under 
the  control  of  the  secular  authority. 

(A)  The  Ecumenical  Council 

The  Council  of  Nicaea  was  held  before  there  was  any  def- 
inition of  the  place  of  an  ecumenical  council.  Many  coun- 
cils were  held  during  the  Arian  controversy  that  were  quite 
as  representative.  It  was  taken  for  granted  that  the  councils 
were  arranged  in  a  scale  of  authority  corresponding  to  the 
extent  of  the  Church  represented.  The  first  clear  statement 
of  this  principle  is  at  the  Council  of  Constantinople  A.  D.  382. 

Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  382,  Canon  2.  Text, 
Hefele,  §  98. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE   STATE   CHURCH    359 

The  so-called  second  general  council  was  held  in  381,  but  in  the  next 
year  nearly  the  same  bishops  were  called  together  by  Theodosius  {cf. 
Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec.^  V,  9).  In  a  letter  addressed  to  the  Western 
bishops  at  a  council  at  Rome  this  council  speaks  of  their  previous  meet- 
ing at  Constantinople  in  381  as  being  an  ecumenical  council.  The 
query  suggests  itself  whether,  considering  the  fact  that  it  actually 
only  represented  the  East  and  did  represent  more  than  one  patriarchate, 
"ecumenical"  might  not  be  understood  as  being  used  in  a  sense  similar 
to  that  in  which  the  African  bishops  spoke  of  their  councils  as  univer- 
salis.    See  Hefele,  §  100,  note. 

The  following  canon  is  printed  as  the  sixth  canon  of  Constantinople, 
A.  D.  381,  in  Hefele  and  the  other  collections,  e.  g.,  Bruns  and  Percival. 

...  If  persons  who  are  neither  heretics,  nor  excommuni- 
cated, nor  condemned,  nor  charged  with  crime  claim  to  have 
a  complaint  in  matters  ecclesiastical  against  the  bishop,^  the 
holy  synod  commands  such  to  bring  their  charges  first  before 
all  the  bishops  of  the  province,  and  to  prove  before  them 
the  charges  against  the  accused  bishop.  But  should  it  hap- 
pen that  the  comprovincials  be  unable  to  settle  the  charges 
alleged  against  the  bishop,  the  complainants  shall  have  re- 
course then  to  the  larger  synod  of  the  bishops  of  that  diocese,^ 
who  shall  be  called  together  on  account  of  the  complaint;  and 
the  complainants  may  not  bring  their  complaint  until  they 
have  agreed  in  writing  to  take  upon  themselves  the  same  pun- 
ishment which  would  have  fallen  upon  the  accused,  in  case 
the  complainants  in  the  course  of  the  matter  should  be  proved 
to  have  brought  a  false  charge  against  the  bishop.  But  if 
any  one,  holding  in  contempt  these  directions,  venture  to 
burden  the  ear  of  the  Emperor,  or  the  tribunals  of  the  secular 
judges,  or  disturb  an  ecumenical  synod,^  dishonoring  the 
bishops  of  their  patriarchal  province,  such  shall  not  be  ad- 
mitted to  make  complaint,  because  he  despises  the  canons 
and  violates  the  Church's  order. 

^7.  e.,  of  their  diocese. 

2  In  the  sense  of  patriarchal  province,  following  the  use  of  the  word  "  dio- 
cese" in  the  administrative  system  of  the  Empire.  It  should  be  noted  that  the 
patriarchal  council  seems  not  to  have  become  well  defined  in  the  Church's 
system  and  never  to  have  come  into  actual  use. 

^For  the  development  of  the  ecumenical  council,  see  below,  §  91,  a.  This 
scheme  of  nicely  adjusted  appeals  never  took  permanent  place  in  the  Church 
owing  to  obvious  difficulties. 


36o  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

(B)  The  Hierarchical  Organization 

(a)  Council  of  Nicaea,  A.  D.  325,  Canons.  Text,  Hefele, 
§  42.     Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  364-368. 

Canons  of  organization. 

Canon  4  regulates  the  ordinations  of  bishops;  Canon  5  orders  that 
excommunications  in  one  diocese  shall  hold  good  everywhere;  Canon 
6  defines  the  larger  provincial  organization  which  eventually  resulted 
in  the  patriarchates;  Canon  7  defines  the  position  of  the  bishopric  of 
Jerusalem;  Canons  15  and  16  place  the  bishops  permanently  in  their 
sees  and  the  clergy  under  their  own  proper  bishop. 

Canon  4.  It  is  by  all  means  proper  that  a  bishop  should  be 
appointed  by  all  the  bishops  in  the  province;  but  should  this 
be  difficult,  either  on  account  of  urgent  necessity  or  because 
of  distance,  three  at  least  should  assemble,  and  the  suffrages 
of  the  absent  should  also  be  given  and  communicated  in 
writing,  and  then  the  ordination  should  take  place.  But 
in  every  province  the  ratification  of  what  is  done  should  be 
left  to  the  metropolitan. 

Canon  5.  Concerning  those,  whether  of  the  clergy  or  of 
the  laity,  who  have  been  excommunicated  in  the  several 
provinces,  let  the  provisions  of  the  canon  be  observed  by  the 
bishops  which  provides  that  persons  cast  out  by  some  be  not 
readmitted  by  others.  .  .  .  Nevertheless,  inquiry  should  be 
made  whether  they  have  been  excommunicated  through  cap- 
tiousness,  or  contentiousness,  or  any  such  like  ungracious 
disposition  in  the  bishops.  And  that  this  matter  may  have 
due  investigation,  it  is  decreed  that  in  every  province  synods 
shall  be  held  twice  a  year,  in  order  that  when  all  the  bishops 
of  the  province  are  assembled  together,  such  questions  may 
be  thoroughly  examined  by  them,  that  so  those  who  have 
confessedly  offended  against  their  bishop  may  be  seen  by 
all  to  be  for  just  causes  excommunicated,  until  it  shall  appear 
fit  to  a  general  meeting  of  the  bishops  to  pronounce  a  milder 
sentence  upon  them.  And  let  these  synods  be  held,  the  one 
before  Lent  (that  the  pure  gift  may  be  offered  to  God  after 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE   CHURCH    361 

all  bitterness  has  been  put  away)  and  let  the  second  be  held 
about  autumn. 

Canon  6.  Let  the  ancient  customs  in  Egypt,  Libya,  and 
Pentapolis  prevail,  that  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  shall  have 
jurisdiction  in  all  these,  since  the  like  is  customary  for  the 
bishop  of  Rome  also.^  Likewise  in  Antioch  and  the  other 
provinces,  let  the  churches  retain  their  privileges.  And  this 
is  to  be  universally  understood,  that  if  any  one  be  made 
bishop  without  the  consent  of  his  metropolitan,  the  great 
synod  has  declared  that  such  a  man  ought  not  to  be  bishop. 
If,  however,  two  or  three  bishops  shall,  from  natural  love  of 
contradiction,  oppose  the  common  suffrage  of  the  rest,  it 
being  reasonable  and  in  accordance  with  the  ecclesiastical 
law,  then  let  the  choice  of  the  majority  prevail. 

Canon  7.  Since  custom  and  ancient  tradition  have  pre- 
vailed that  the  bishop  of  JElia.  [i.  e.,  Jerusalem]  should  be 
honored,  let  him,  saving  its  due  dignity  to  the  metropoHs, 
have  the  next  place  of  honor. 

Canon  15.  On  account  of  the  great  disturbance  and  dis- 
cords that  occur,  it  is  decreed  that  the  custom  prevaihng  in 
certain  places  contrary  to  the  canon  must  wholly  be  done 
away;  so  that  neither  bishop,  presbyter,  nor  deacon  shall 
pass  from  city  to  city.  And  if  any  one,  after  this  decree  of 
the  holy  and  great  synod,  shall  attempt  any  such  thing  or 
continue  in  such  course,  his  proceedings  shall  be  utterly  void, 
and  he  shall  be  restored  to  the  church  for  which  he  was  or- 
dained bishop  or  presbyter. 

Canon  16.  Neither  presbyters,  nor  deacons,  nor  any  others 
enrolled  among  the  clergy,  who,  not  having  the  fear  of  God 
before  their  eyes,  nor  regarding  the  ecclesiastical  canon,  shall 
recklessly  remove  from  their  own  church,  ought  by  any  means 
to  be  received  by  another  church;  but  every  constraint  should 

^This  six^h  canon  of  Nicaea  very  early  received  the  title:  "Concerning  the 
Primacy  of  the  Roman  Church,"  and  had  this  addition  placed  as  its  first  clause: 
"The  Roman  Church  has  always  had  the  primacy."  In  this  form  the  canon 
was  cited  by  the  Roman  legates  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  in  451,  but  they 
were  immediately  confuted  by  the  Eastern  theologians. 


362  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

be  applied  to  restore  them  to  their  own  parishes  ;i  and,  if  they 
will  not  go,  they  must  be  excommunicated.  And  if  one  shall 
dare  surreptitiously  to  carry  off  and  in  his  own  church  ordain 
a  man  belonging  to  another,  without  the  consent  of  his  own 
proper  bishop  from  whom,  although  he  was  enrolled  in  the 
clergy  list,  he  has  seceded,  let  the  ordination  be  void. 

(b)  Synod  of  Antioch,  A.  D.  341,  Canons,  Bruns,  I,  80/. 

Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  439. ff- 

For  the  Council  of  Antioch,  see  §  65,  c.  These  canons  on  discipline 
were  held  in  highest  authority  in  the  Church,  although  enacted  by 
Arians  whose  creed  was  rejected.  They  obtained  this  position  in  the 
law  of  the  Church  because  they  carried  further  the  natural  line  of 
development  long  since  taken  in  the  ecclesiastical  system.  Cf.  Hefele, 
§56. 

Canon  2.  All  who.  enter  the  Church  of  God  and  hear  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  but  do  not  communicate  with  the  people  in 
prayers,  or  who  turn  away,  by  reason  of  some  disorder,  from 
the  holy  partaking  of  the  eucharist,  are  to  be  cast  out  of  the 
Church  until,  after  they  shall  have  made  confession,  have 
brought  forth  fruits  of  penance,  and  have  made  earnest  en- 
treaty, they  shall  have  obtained  forgiveness;  and  it  is  unlawful 
to  communicate  with  excommunicated  persons,  or  to  assemble 
in  private  houses  and  pray  with  those  who  do  not  pray  in  the 
Church;  or  to  receive  in  one  church  those  who  do  not  as- 
semble with  another  church.  And  if  any  one  of  the  bishops, 
presbyters,  or  deacons,  or  any  one  in  the  canon  shall  be  found 
communicating  with  excommunicated  persons,  let  him  also 
be  excommunicated,  as  one  who  brings  confusion  on  the 
order  of  the  Church. 

Canon  3.  If  any  presbyter  or  deacon  or  any  one  whatever 
belonging  to  the  priesthood  shall  forsake  his  own  parish  and 
shall  depart,  and,  having  wholly  changed  his  residence,  shall 
set  himself  to  remain  for  a  long  time  in  another  parish,  let 
him  no  longer  officiate;  especially  if  his  own  bishop  shall 
summon  and  urge  him  to  return  to  his  own  parish,  and  he 
^  Here,  as  generally,  parish  means  diocese. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE   CHURCH    363 

shall  disobey.  And  if  he  persist  in  his  disorder,  let  him  be 
wholly  deposed  from  his  ministry,  so  that  no  further  room 
be  left  for  his  restoration.  And  if  another  bishop  shall  re- 
ceive a  man  deposed  for  this  cause,  let  him  be  punished  by 
the  common  synod  as  one  who  nullifies  the  ecclesiastical  laws. 

Canon  4.  If  any  bishop  be  deposed  by  a  synod,  or  any 
presbyter  or  deacon,  who  has  been  deposed  by  his  bishop, 
shall  presume  to  execute  any  part  of  the  ministry,  whether 
it  be  a  bishop  according  to  his  former  function,  or  a  presbyter, 
or  a  deacon,  he  shall  no  longer  have  any  prospect  of  restora- 
tion in  another  synod,  nor  any  opportunity  of  making  his 
defence;  but  they  who  communicate  with  him  shall  be  cast 
out  of  the  Church,  and  particularly  if  they  have  presumed  to 
communicate  with  the  persons  aforementioned,  knowing  the 
sentence  pronounced  against  them. 

Canon  6.  If  any  one  has  been  excommunicated  by  his  own 
bishop,  let  him  not  be  received  by  others  until  he  has  either 
been  restored  by  his  own  bishop,  or  until,  when  a  synod  is 
held,  he  shall  have  appeared  and  made  his  defence,  and, 
having  convinced  the  synod,  shall  have  received  a  different 
sentence.  And  let  this  decree  apply  to  the  laity,  and  to  the 
presbyters  and  deacons,  and  all  who  are  enrolled  in  the  clergy 
list. 

Canon  9.  It  behooves  the  bishops  in  each  province  to 
acknowledge  the  bishop  who  presides  in  the  metropolis,  and 
who  has  to  take  thought  of  the  whole  province;  because  all 
men  of  business  come  together  from  every  quarter  to  the 
metropolis.  Wherefore  it  is  decreed  that  he  have  precedence 
in  rank,  and  that  the  other  bishops  do  nothing  extraordinary 
without  him,  according  to  the  ancient  canon  which  prevailed 
from  the  time  of  our  fathers,  or  such  things  only  as  pertain 
to  their  own  particular  parishes  and  the  districts  subject  to 
them.  For  each  bishop  has  authority  over  his  own  parish, 
both  to  manage  it  with  piety,  which  is  incumbent  on  every 
one,  and  to  make  provision  for  the  whole  district  which  is 
dependent  upon  his  city;  to  ordain  presbyters  and  deacons; 


364  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

and  to  settle  everything  with  judgment.  But  let  him  not 
undertake  anything  further  without  the  bishop  of  the  metrop- 
olis; neither  the  latter  without  the  consent  of  the  others. 

Canon  10.  The  holy  synod  decrees  that  those  [bishops] 
living  in  village  and  country  districts,  or  those  who  are  called 
chorepiscopi,  even  though  they  have  received  ordination  to 
the  episcopate,  shall  regard  their  own  limits  and  manage  the 
churches  subject  to  them,  and  be  content  with  the  care  and 
administration  of  these;  but  they  may  ordain  readers,  sub- 
deacons,  and  exorcists,  and  shall  be  content  with  promoting 
these;  but  they  shall  not  presume  to  ordain  either  a  presby- 
ter or  a  deacon,  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  city 
to  which  he  and  his  district  are  subject.  And  if  he  shall  dare 
to  transgress  these  decrees,  he  shall  be  deposed  from  the  rank 
which  he  enjoys.  And  a  chorepiscopus  is  to  be  appointed 
by  the  bishop  of  the  city  to  which  he  is  subject. 

(c)  Council  of  Sardica,  A.  D.  343  or  344,  Canons,  Bruns, 
I,  88.     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  113,  and  Kirch,  nn.  448^. 

The  Council  of  Sardica  was  intended  to  be  composed  of  representa- 
tives from  the  entire  Empire  who  might  be  able  to  settle  once  and  for 
all  the  Arian  question.  It  met  at  Sardica  on  the  boundary  between 
the  two  divisions  of  the  Empire  as  they  were  then  defined.  The  Eastern 
ecclesiastics,  strongly  Arian,  found  themselves  outnumbered  by  the 
Western  bishops  who  supported  Athanasius  and  the  Nicene  definition 
of  faith.  The  Eastern  representatives  withdrew  to  Philippopolis  near 
by,  and  held  their  own  council.  The  following  canons  were  intended 
to  provide  a  system  of  appeal  for  cases  like  that  of  Athanasius,  and 
although  they  do  not  seem  to  have  been  acted  upon  enough  to  have 
become  a  part  of  the  Church's  system,  yet  they  were  of  great  impor- 
tance inasmuch  as  subsequently  they  were  used  as  late  as  the  ninth 
century  for  a  support  to  a  wholly  different  system  of  appeals.  These 
canons  were  very  early  attributed  to  the  Council  of  Nicasa  A.  D.  325. 

Canon  3.  Bishop  Hosius  said:  This,  also,  it  is  necessary 
to  add — that  bishops  shall  not  pass  from  their  own  province 
to  another  province  in  which  there  are  bishops,  unless  per- 
chance they  are  invited  by  their  brethren,  that  we  seem  not 
to  close  the  door  to  charity.  But  if  in  any  province  a  bishop 
have  an  action  against  his  brother  bishop,  neither  shall  call 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE  CHURCH    365 

in  as  judge  a  bishop  from  another  province.  But  if  judgment 
shall  have  gone  against  any  bishop  in  a  case,  and  he  think 
that  he  has  a  good  case,  in  order  that  the  question  may  be 
heard,  let  us,  if  it  be  your  pleasure,  honor  the  memory  of 
St.  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  let  those  who  have  tried  the  case 
write  to  Julius,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  if  he  shall  decide 
that  the  case  should  be  retried,  let  it  be  retried,  and  let  him 
appoint  judges;  but  if  he  shall  be  satisfied  that  the  case  is 
such  that  what  has  been  done  should  not  be  disturbed,  what 
has  been  decreed  shall  be  confirmed. 

Is  this  the  pleasure  of  all?  The  synod  answered:  It  is  our 
pleasure. 

Canon  4.  Bishop  Gaudentius  said:  If  it  please  you,  it  is 
necessary  to  add  to  this  sentence,  which  full  of  sincere  charity 
thou  hast  pronounced,  that  if  any  bishop  has  been  deposed 
by  the  judgment  of  those  bishops  who  happened  to  be  in  the 
vicinity,  and  he  asserts  that  he  has  fresh  matter  in  defence,  a 
new  bishop  is  not  to  be  settled  in  his  see,  unless  the  bishop 
of  Rome  judge  and  render  a  decision  as  to  this. 

Latin  Version  of  Canon  4.  Bishop  Gaudentius  said:  If  it 
please  you,  there  ought  to  be  added  to  this  sentence,  which 
full  of  hoHness  thou  hast  pronounced,  that  if  any  bishop  has 
been  deposed  by  the  judgment  of  those  bishops  who  dwell  in 
the  vicinity,  and  he  asserts  that  the  business  ought  to  be  con- 
ducted by  him  in  the  city  of  Rome,  another  bishop  should  in 
nowise  be  ordained  in  his  see  after  the  appellation  of  him  who 
appears  to  have  been  deposed,  unless  the  cause  shall  have  been 
determined  by  the  judgment  of  the  bishop  of  Rome. 

Canon  5.^  Bishop  Hosius  said:  Let  it  be  decreed  that  if 
a  bishop  shall  have  been  accused  and  the  assembled  bishops 
of  the  same  region  shall  have  deposed  him  from  his  ojOGice, 
and  he,  so  to  speak,  appeals  and  takes  refuge  with  the  bishop 
of  the  Roman  Church  and  wishes  to  be  heard  by  him,  if  he^ 
think  it  right  to  renew  the  examination  of  his  case,  let  him  be 

^  This  is  the  seventh  canon  of  the  Latin  version  of  the  canons. 
2  /.  e.,  Bishop  of  Rome. 


366  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

pleased  to  write  to  those  of  fellow-bishops  who  are  nearest  the 
province  that  they  may  examine  the  particulars  with  care 
and  accuracy  and  give  their  votes  on  the  matter  in  accord- 
ance with  the  word  of  truth.  And  if  any  one  demand  that 
his  case  be  heard  yet  again,  and  at  his  request  it  seems  good 
to  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  send  presbyters  from  his  own  side, 
let  it  be  in  the  power  of  that  bishop,  according  as  he  judges 
it  to  be  good  and  decides  it  to  be  right,  that  some  be  sent  to 
be  judges  with  the  bishops  and  invested  with  his  authority 
by  whom  they  were  sent.  And  be  this  also  ordained.  But  if 
he  thinks  that  they  [the  bishops]  are  sufficient  for  the  hearing 
and  determining  of  the  matter  of  the  bishop,  let  him  do  what 
shall  seem  good  in  his  most  prudent  judgment. 
The  bishops  answered:  What  has  been  said  is  approved. 

(d)  Gratian  and  Valentinian,  Rescript;  A.  D.  378.    (MSG, 

13:586.)     Mirbt,  nn.  118/. 

This  rescript  was  sent  in  answer  to  a  petition  addressed  to  the  em- 
perors by  a  Roman  council  under  Damasus.  It  is,  therefore,  found 
connected  with  an  epistle  in  the  works  of  Damasus.  It  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  the  foundation  of  any  claim  or  to  have  played  any 
considerable  part  in  the  development  of  the  Roman  primacy.  It  is 
of  importance  in  the  present  connection  as  illustrating  the  part 
emperors  took  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Church.  For  Damasus 
and  the  disturbances  in  connection  with  his  election,  v.  infra,  §  74,  a. 
The  rescript  may  be  found  in  Mansi,  III,  624;  Hardouin,  I,  842;  and 
in  Gieseler,  I,  380. 

6.  If  any  one  shall  have  been  condemned  by  the  judgment 
of  Damasus,  which  he  shall  have  dehvered  with  the  council 
of  five  or  seven  bishops,  or  by  the  judgment  or  council  of 
those  who  are  CathoHcs,  and  if  he  shall  unlawfully  attempt 
to  retain  his  church,^  in  order  that  such  a  one,  who  has  been 
called  to  the  priestly  judgment,  shall  not  escape  by  his  con- 
tumacy, it  is  our  will  that  such  a  one  be  remitted  by  the 
illustrious  prefects  of  Gaul  and  Italy,  either  by  the  proconsul 
or  the  vicars,  use  having  been  made  of  due  authority,  to  the 
episcopal  judgment,  and  shall  come  to  the  city  of  Rome  under 

1  /.  e.,  ecclesiastical  position. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE   CHURCH    367 

an  escort;  or  if  such  insolence  of  any  one  shall  appear  in 
parts  very  far  distant,  the  entire  pleading  of  his  case  shall  be 
brought  to  the  examination  of  the  metropolitan  of  the  prov- 
ince in  which  the  bishop  is,  or  if  he  himself  is  the  metropolitan, 
then  of  necessity  he  shall  hasten  without  delay  to  Rome,  or 
to  those  whom  the  Roman  bishop  shall  assign  as  judges,  so  that 
whoever  shall  have  been  deposed  shall  be  removed  from  the 
confines  of  the  city  in  which  they  were  priests.  For  we  pim- 
ish  those  who  deserve  punishment  less  severely  than  they 
deserve,  and  we  take  vengeance  upon  their  sacrilegious  stub- 
bornness more  gently  than  it  merits.  And  if  the  unfairness 
or  partiality  of  any  metropolitan,  bishop,  or  priest  is  sus- 
pected, it  is  allowed  to  appeal  to  the  Roman  bishop  or  to  a 
council  gathered  of  fifteen  neighboring  bishops,  but  so  that 
after  the  examination  of  the  case  shall  have  been  concluded 
what  was  settled  shall  not  be  begun  over  again. 

(e)  Codex  Theodosiamis,  XVI,  i,  2;   Feb.  27,  A.  D.  380. 

Cf.  Kirch,  n.  755. 

The  following  edict  was  issued  by  Gratian,  Valentinian  and  Theo- 
dosius,  requiring  the  acceptance  of  the  orthodox  faith  by  all  subjects. 
In  other  words,  the  emperors,  following  the  example  of  Constantius 
and  Valens  in  enforcing  Arianism,  are  now  enforcing  the  Nicene  the- 
ology. Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  4,  gives  the  circumstances  under 
which  this  edict  was  issued. 

It  is  our  will  that  all  the  peoples  whom  the  government  of 
our  clemency  rules  shall  follow  that  religion  which  a  pious 
belief  from  Peter  to  the  present  declares  the  holy  Peter 
delivered  to  the  Romans,  and  which  it  is  evident  the  pontiff 
Damasus  and  Peter,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  a  man  of  apos- 
tohc  sanctity,  follow;  that  is,  that  according  to  the  apostolic 
discipline  and  evangelical  doctrine  we  beheve  in  the  deity  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  of  equal  majesty, 
in  a  holy  trinity.  Those  who  follow  this  law  we  command 
shall  be  comprised  under  the  name  of  Cathohc  Christians; 
but  others,  indeed,  we  require,  as  insane  and  raving,  to  bear  the 
infamy  of  heretical  teaching;  their  gatherings  shall  not  re- 


368  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

ceive  the  name  of  churches;  they  are  to  be  smitten  first  with 
the  divine  punishment  and  after  that  by  the  vengeance  of  our 
indignation,  which  has  the  divine  approval. 

(/)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  1,3. 

Gratian,  Valentinian,  and  Theodosius  to  Auxonius,  proconsul  of 
Asia. 

To  enforce  still  further  the  principles  of  Nicene  orthodoxy  certain 
bishops  were  named  as  teachers  of  the  true  faith,  communion  with 
whom  was  a  test  of  orthodoxy. 

We  command  that  all  churches  be  forthwith  delivered  up 
to  the  bishops  who  confess  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  be  of  one  majesty  and  power;  of  the  same  glory 
and  of  one  splendor,  making  no  distinction  by  any  profane 
division,  but  rather  harmony  by  the  assertion  of  the  trinity 
of  the  persons  and  the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  to  the  bishops 
who  are  associated  in  communion  with  Nectarius,  bishop  of 
the  Church  of  Constantinople,  and  with  Timotheus  in  Egypt, 
bishop  of  the  city  of  Alexandria;  in  the  parts  of  the  Orient, 
who  are  in  communion  with  Pelagius,  bishop  of  Laodicaea 
and  Diodorus,  bishop  of  Tarsus;  in  proconsular  Asia  and  in 
the  diocese  of  Asia,  who  are  in  communion  with  Amphilochius, 
bishop  of  Iconium,  and  Optimus,  bishop  of  Antioch;  in  the 
diocese  of  Pontus,  who  are  in  communion  with  Helladius, 
bishop  of  Caesarea,  and  Otreius,  bishop  of  Melitina,  and 
Gregory,  bishop  of  Nyssa,  Terennius,  bishop  of  Scythia,  Mar- 
marius,  bishop  of  MarcianopoHs.  Those  who  are  of  the  com- 
munion and  fellowship  of  approved  priests^  ought  to  be  ad- 
mitted to  possess  the  CathoHc  churches;  but  all  who  dissent 
from  the  communion  of  the  faith  of  those  whom  the  special 
list  has  named  ought  to  be  expelled  from  the  churches  as 
manifest  heretics;  and  no  opportunity  whatsoever  ought  to 
be  allowed  them  henceforth  of  obtaining  episcopal  churches^ 
that  the  priestly  orders  of  the  true  and  Nicene  faith  may 
remain  pure  and  no  place  be  given  to  evil  cunning,  according 
to  the  evident  form  of  our  precept. 

^  I.  e.,  bishops.  2  /^  g_^  episcopal  sees. 


CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE   CHURCH    369 

(g)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381,  Address  to  Theo- 
dosius.    See  Mansi,  III,  557. 

The  following  letter  illustrates  the  relation  of  the  councils  in  the 
East  to  the  imperial  authority.  The  emperors  called  the  various 
general  councils,  directed  their  discussions  and  confirmed  the  results. 
In  this  way  their  findings  were  given  the  force  of  laws  and  authority 
throughout  the  Church.     V.  infra,  §§  90,  91. 

To  the  most  religious  Emperor  Theodosius,  the  holy  S3niod 
of  bishops  assembled  in  Constantinople  out  of  different  prov- 
inces. 

We  begin  our  letter  to  your  Piety  with  thanks  to  God,  who 
has  established  the  Empire  of  your  Piety  for  the  common  peace 
of  the  churches  and  for  the  support  of  the  true  faith.  And, 
after  rendering  due  thanks  unto  God,  as  in  duty  bound,  we 
lay  before  your  Piety  the  things  which  have  been  done  in  the 
holy  synod.  When,  then,  we  had  assembled  in  Constanti- 
nople, according  to  the  letter  of  your  Piety,  we  first  of  all 
renewed  our  unity  of  heart  each  with  the  other,  and  then  we 
pronounced  some  concise  definitions,  ratifying  the  faith  of 
the  Nicene  Fathers,  and  anathematizing  the  heresies  which 
have  sprung  up  contrary  thereto.  Besides  these  things,  we 
also  framed  certain  canons  for  the  better  ordering  of  the 
churches,  all  which  we  have  subjoined  to  this  our  letter. 
We  therefore  beseech  your  Piety  that  the  decree  of  the  synod 
may  be  ratified,  to  the  end  that  as  you  have  honored  the 
Church  by  your  letter  of  citation,  so  you  should  set  your  seal 
to  the  conclusion  of  what  has  been  decreed.  May  the  Lord 
establish  your  Empire  in  peace  and  righteousness,  and  pro- 
long it  from  generation  to  generation;  and  may  He  add  unto 
your  earthly  powers  the  fruition  of  the  heavenly  kingdom 
also.  May  God,  by  the  prayers  of  the  saints,  show  favor  to 
the  world,  that  you  may  be  strong  and  eminent  in  all  good 
things  as  an  Emperor  most  truly  pious  and  beloved  of  God. 

Qi)  Synod  of  Antioch,  A.  D.  341,  Canons,  Bruns,  I,  80. 

The  following  canons  passed  at  Antioch  are  the  first  touching  a 
habit  which  they  did  little  to  correct.     The  so-called  sixth  canon  of 


370  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

Constantinople,  381,  in  reality  a  canon  of  the  council  of  the  next  year, 
took  up  the  matter  again.  All  through  the  great  controversies  appeals 
were  constantly  made  to  the  emperors  because,  after  all,  they  alone 
had  the  authority.     Cf.  Hefele,  §  56. 

Canon  11.  If  any  bishop,  or  presbyter,  or  any  one  whatever 
of  the  canon  shall  presume  to  betake  himself  to  the  Emperor 
without  the  consent  and  letters  of  his  bishop  of  the  province 
and  particularly  of  the  bishop  of  the  metropolis,  such  a  one 
shall  be  publicly  deposed  and  cast  out,  not  only  from  the 
communion,  but  also  from  the  rank  which  he  happens  to  have 
had;  inasmuch  as  he  dares  to  trouble  the  ears  of  our  Emperor, 
beloved  of  God,  contrary  to  the  law  of  the  Church.  But, 
if  necessary  business  shall  require  any  one  to  go  to  the  Em- 
peror, let  him  do  it  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  metro- 
politan and  other  bishops  in  the  province,  and  let  him  under- 
take his  journey  with  the  letters  from  them. 

Canon  12.  If  any  presbyter  or  deacon  deposed  by  his  own 
bishop,  or  any  bishop  deposed  by  a  synod,  shall  dare  trouble 
the  ears  of  the  Emperor,  when  it  is  his  duty  to  submit  his  case 
to  a  greater  synod  of  bishops,  and  to  refer  to  more  bishops  the 
things  which  he  thinks  right,  and  to  abide  by  the  examination 
and  decision  made  by  them;  if,  despising  these,  he  shall 
trouble  the  Emperor,  he  shall  be  entitled  to  no  pardon,  neither 
shall  he  have  opportunity  of  defence,  nor  any  hope  of  future 
restoration. 

§  73.    Sole  Authority  of  the  State  Church    , 

When  Theodosius  had  successfully  forced  upon  the  East 
the  theology  of  Nicaea,  his  policy  as  to  religious  matters  was 
manifest.  No  longer  was  heresy  to  be  allowed.  Laws  were 
to  control  opinion  in  the  same  way  that  they  did  conduct. 
The  old  plea  of  the  persecuted  Christians  under  the  heathen 
Roman  Empire,  religio  non  cogi  potest,  was  completely  forgot- 
ten. As  Christianity  was  the  one  sole  religion  of  divine  char- 
acter, based  upon  the  unique  divine  act  of  the  incarnation, 
it  was  folly  to  allow  men  to  continue  in  heathenism — it  might 


SOLE  AUTHORITY  OF  STATE   CHURCH      371 

even  be  dangerous  to  the  State  to  allow  them,  as  it  might 
bring  down  the  just  vengeance  of  God.  With  this  policy  the 
populace  was  completely  in  accord,  especially  when  it  led 
to  the  plunder  and  destruction  of  heathen  sanctuaries,  and 
many  of  the  more  zealous  of  the  clergy  were  willing  to  lead  in 
the  assault.  In  these  ways  the  State  Church  obtained  a  two- 
fold exclusive  authority:  as  regards  heathenism,  and  as  re- 
gards heresy. 

(a)  Codex  Theodosianus. 
Laws  regarding  heathenism. 
XVI,  10,  14;  A.  D.  399. 

Whatever  privileges  were  conceded  by  the  ancient  laws  to 
the  priests,  ministers,  prefects,  hierophants  of  sacred  things, 
or  by  whatsoever  name  they  may  be  designated,  are  to  be 
abolished  henceforth,  and  let  them  not  think  that  they  are 
protected  by  a  granted  privilege  when  their  religious  confes- 
sion is  known  to  have  been  condemned  by  the  law. 

XVI,  10,  16;  A.  D.  399. 

If  there  are  temples  in  the  fields,  let  them  be  destroyed 
without  crowd  or  tumult.  For  when  these  have  been  thrown 
down  and  carried  away,  the  support  of  superstition  will  be 
consumed. 

XVI,  10,  15;   A.  D.  399. 

This  law  appears  again  in  the  Cod.  Just.,  I,  13,  3,  for  it  appears  to 
have  been  necessary  even  as  late  as  the  sixth  century  to  prevent  un- 
authorized destructions  of  temples  which  were  in  the  cities  and  might 
be  fairly  regarded  as  ornaments  to  the  city. 

We  prohibit  sacrifices  yet  so  that  we  wish  that  the  orna- 
ments of  pubKc  works  to  be  preserved.  And  that  those  who 
attempt  to  overthrow  them  may  not  flatter  themselves  that 
it  is  with  some  authority,  if  any  rescript  or,  perchance,  law 
is  alleged,  let  these  documents  be  taken  from  their  hands 
and  referred  to  our  knowledge. 


372  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE  CHURCH 

XVI,  lo,  21 ;    A.  D.  416. 

Those  who  are  polluted  by  the  error  or  crime  of  pagan  rites 
are  not  to  be  admitted  to  the  army  nor  to  receive  the  dis- 
tinction and  honor  of  administrator  or  judge. 

XVI,  10,  23;  A.  D.  423. 

Although  the  pagans  that  remain  ought  to  be  subjected 
to  capital  punishment  if  at  any  time  they  are  detected  in  the 
abominable  sacrifices  of  demons,  let  exile  and  confiscation 
of  goods  be  their  punishment. 

XVI,  10,  24;  A.  D.  423.    (Retained  in  Cod.  Just.,  1,  11,  16.) 

The  Manichaeans  and  those  who  are  called  Pepyzitae  [Mon- 
tanists]  and  also  those  who  by  this  one  opinion  are  worse  than 
all  heretics,  in  that  they  dissent  from  all  as  to  the  venerable 
day  of  the  Easter  festival,  we  subject  to  the  same  punishment, 
viz.:  confiscation  of  goods  and  exile,  if  they  persist  in  the 
same  unreason.  But  this  we  especially  demand  of  Chris- 
tians, both  those  who  are  really  such  and  those  who  are  called 
such,  that  they  presume  not,  by  an  abuse  of  rehgion,  to  lay 
hands  upon  the  Jews  and  pagans  who  live  peaceably  and  who 
attempt  nothing  riotous  or  contrary  to  the  laws.  For  if 
they  should  do  violence  to  them  living  securely  and  take 
away  their  goods,  let  them  be  compelled  to  restore  not  merely 
what  they  have  taken  away  but  threefold  and  fourfold.  Let 
the  rectors  of  provinces,  officials,  and  provincials  know  that 
if  they  permit  these  things  to  be  done,  they  themselves  will 
be  punished,  as  well  as  those  who  do  them. 

{b)  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  29.     (MSG,  82  :  1256.) 

The  destruction  of  temples. 

The  following  passage  is  illustrative  of  the  temper  of  those  who  took 
part  in  the  destruction  of  heathen  sanctuaries.  The  imperial  edicts  for 
these  acts  were  obtained  in  399.  Chrysostom,  the  leader  in  the  move- 
ment, fairly  represents  the  best  thought  and  temper  of  the  Church. 

On  receiving  information  that  Phoenicia  was  still  suffering 
from  the  madness  of  the  demons'  rites,  he  [John  Chrysostom] 
got  together  some  monks  fired  with  divine  zeal  and  despatched 


SOLE  AUTHORITY  OF  STATE  CHURCH      373 

them,  armed  with  imperial  edicts,  against  the  idols'  shrines. 
He  did  not  draw  from  the  imperial  treasury  the  money  to 
pay  the  craftsmen  and  their  assistants  who  were  engaged  in 
the  work  of  destruction,  but  he  persuaded  certain  faithful 
and  wealthy  women  to  make  liberal  contributions,  pointing 
out  to  them  how  great  would  be  the  blessing  their  generosity 
would  win.  Thus  the  remaining  shrines  of  the  demons  were 
utterly  destroyed. 

(c)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  15.     (MSG,  67  :  768.) 

The  murder  of  Hypatia. 

The  fearful  murder  of  Hypatia  represents  another  aspect  of  the 
opposition  to  heathenism,  in  which  the  populace  seconded  the  efforts 
of  the  authorities  in  a  poHcy  of  extirpating  paganism. 

There  was  a  woman  in  Alexandria  named  Hypatia.  She 
was  the  daughter  of  the  philosopher  Theon,  and  she  had 
attained  such  a  proficiency  in  Hterature  and  science  as  to  sur- 
pass by  far  all  the  philosophers  of  her  own  time.  Having 
succeeded  to  the  Platonic  school,  which  had  come  down  from 
Plotinus,  she  explained  all  the  principles  of  philosophy  to 
her  auditors.  Therefore  many  from  all  sides,  wishing  to  study 
philosophy,  came  to  her.  On  account  of  the  self-possession 
and  ease  of  manner  which  she  had  acquired  by  her  study, 
she  not  infrequently  appeared  with  modesty  in  the  presence 
of  magistrates.  Neither  did  she  feel  abashed  in  entering  an 
assembly  of  men.  For  all  men,  on  account  of  her  extraordi- 
nary dignity  and  virtue,  admired  her  the  more.  Against  her 
envious  hostiHty  arose  at  that  time.  For  as  she  had  fre- 
quent interviews  with  Orestes  [governor  of  Alexandria]  it 
was  calumniously  reported  among  the  Christian  populace 
that  it  was  she  who  prevented  Orestes  from  being  reconciled 
to  the  bishop  [Cyril].  Some  men  of  this  opinion  and  of  a  hot- 
headed disposition,  whose  leader  was  a  reader  named  Peter, 
waylaid  her  returning  home.  Dragging  her  from  her  carriage 
they  took  her  to  the  church  called  Caesareum.  There  they 
completely  stripped  her  and  murdered  her  with  tiles.     When 


374  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

they  had  torn  her  in  pieces,  they  took  her  mangled  limbs  to 
a  place  called  Cinaron,  and  there  they  burnt  them.  This 
affair  brought  no  little  opprobrium,  not  only  upon  Cyril  but 
also  upon  the  whole  Alexandrian  Church.  And  surely  mur- 
ders, fights,  and  actions  of  that  sort  are  altogether  alien  to 
those  who  hold  the  things  of  Christ.  These  things  happened 
in  the  fourth  year  of  the  episcopate  of  Cyril  [415]. 

(d)  Socrates,  FlisL  Ec,  VII,  11.     (MSG,  67  :  757.) 

Novatians  and  the  Church  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century. 

Socrates  is  the  principal  authority  for  the  later  history  of  the  Nova- 
tians. It  is  probable  that  his  interest  in  them  and  evident  sympathy 
for  them  were'  due  to  some  connection  with  the  sect,  perhaps  in  his 
early  years,  and  he  gives  many  incidents  in  their  history,  otherwise 
unknown. 

After  Innocent  [401-417],  Zosimus  [417-418]  governed  the 
Roman  Church  for  two  years,  and  after  him  Boniface  [418- 
422]  presided  over  it  for  three  years.  Celestinus  [422-432] 
succeeded  him,  and  this  Celestinus  took  away  the  churches 
from  the  Novatians  at  Rome  and  obliged  Rusticula,  their 
bishop,  to  hold  his  meetings  secretly  in  private  houses.  Until 
this  time  the  Novatians  had  flourished  exceedingly  in  Rome, 
having  many  churches  there  and  gathering  large  congrega- 
tions. But  envy  attacked  them  there,  also,  as  soon  as  the 
Roman  episcopate,  like  that  of  Alexandria,  extended  itself 
beyond  the  limits  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  and  degen- 
erated into  its  present  state  of  secular  domination.  And  for 
this  cause  the  bishops  would  not  suffer  even  those  who  agreed 
with  them  in  matters  of  faith  to  enjoy  the  privileges  of  assem- 
bling in  peace,  but  stripping  them  of  all  they  possessed, 
praised  them  merely  for  these  agreements  in  faith.  The 
bishops  of  Constantinople  kept  themselves  free  from  this 
sort  of  conduct;  in  so  much  as  in  addition  to  tolerating 
them  and  permitting  them  to  hold  their  assemblies  within 
the  city,  as  I  have  already  stated,^  they  treated  them  with 
every  mark  of  Christian  regard. 

*  See  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  10. 


SOLE  AUTHORITY  OF   STATE   CHURCH      375 

(e)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XVI,  5,  40;  A.  D.  407. 

Edict  of  Arcadius  and  Honorius  against  the  Manicha^ans  and  other 
heretics.     (Retained  in  Cod.  Just.,  I,  5,  4.)     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  155. 

What  we  have  thought  concerning  the  Donatists  we  have 
recently  set  forth.  Especially  do  we  pursue,  with  well-merited 
severity,  the  Manichaeans,  the  Phrygians,  and  the  Priscillian- 
ists,^  since  men  of  this  sort  have  nothing  in  common  with 
others,  neither  in  custom  nor  laws.  And  first  we  declare 
that  their  crime  is  against  the  State,  because  what  is  com- 
mitted against  the  divine  religion  is  held  an  injury  of  all. 
And  we  will  take  vengeance  upon  them  by  the  confiscation 
of  their  goods,  which,  however,  w^e  command  shall  fall  to 
whomsoever  is  nearest  of  their  kindred,  in  ascending  or  de- 
scending lines  or  cognates  of  collateral  branches  to  the  second 
degree,  as  the  order  is  in  succession  to  goods.  Yet  it  shall 
be  so  that  we  suffer  the  right  to  receive  the  goods  to  belong 
to  them,  only  if  they  themselves  are  not  in  the  same  way  pol- 
luted in  their  conscience.  And  it  is  our  will  that  they  be 
deprived  of  every  grant  or  succession  from  whatever  title 
derived.  In  addition,  we  do  not  leave  to  any  one  convicted 
of  this  crime  the  right  of  giving,  buying,  selling,  or  finally 
of  making  a  contract.  The  prosecution  shall  continue  till 
death.  For  if  in  the  case  of  the  crime  of  treason  it  is  lawful 
to  attack  the  memory  of  the  deceased,  not  without  desert 
ought  he  to  endure  condemnation.  Therefore  let  his  last 
will  and  testament  be  invalid,  whether  he  leave  property  by 
testament,  codicil,  epistle,  or  by  any  sort  of  will,  if  ever  he 
has  been  convicted  of  being  a  Manichaean,  Phrygian,  or  Pris- 
cillianist,  and  in  this  case  the  same  order  is  to  be  followed  as 
in  the  grades  above  stated;  and  we  do  not  permit  sons  to 
succeed  as  heirs  unless  they  forsake  the  paternal  depravity; 
for  we  grant  forgiveness  of  the  offence  to  those  repenting. 
We  will  that  slaves  be  without  harm  if,  rejecting  their  sacri- 
legious master,  they  pass  over  to  the  CathoHc  Church  by  a 

^In  the  code  of  Justinian  this  reads  ''Manichaeans  and  Donatists." 


376  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

more  faithful  service.  Property  on  which  a  congregation  of 
men  of  this  sort  assemble,  in  case  the  owner,  although  not  a 
participator  in  the  crime,  is  aware  of  the  meeting  and  does 
not  forbid  it,  is  to  be  annexed  to  our  patrimony;  if  the  owner 
is  ignorant,  let  the  agent  or  steward  of  the  property,  having 
been  punished  with  scourging,  be  sent  to  labor  in  the  mines, 
and  the  one  who  hires  the  property,  if  he  be  a  person  liable 
to  such  sort  of  punishment,  be  deported.  Let  the  rectors  of 
provinces,  if  by  fraud  or  force  they  delay  the  punishment  of 
these  crimes  when  they  have  been  reported,  or  if  conviction 
have  been  obtained  neglect  punishment,  know  that  they  will 
be  subject  to  the  fine  of  twenty  pounds  of  gold.  As  for  defen- 
sors and  heads  of  the  various  cities  and  the  provincial  officials, 
a  penalty  of  ten  pounds  is  to  compel  them  to  do  their  duty, 
unless  performing  those  things  which  have  been  laid  down  by 
the  judges  in  this  matter,  they  give  the  most  intelligent  care 
and  the  most  ready  help. 

(/)  Leo  the  Great,  Epistula  7.     (MSL,  54  :  620.) 

Manichaeanism  in  Rome. 

This  epistle,  addressed  to  the  bishops  throughout  Italy,  shows  the 
way  in  which  zealous  bishops  could,  and  were  expected  to,  co-operate 
with  the  secular  authorities  in  putting  down  heresy. 

Leo  the  Great  [440-461],  the  greatest  of  the  popes  before  Gregory 
the  Great,  was  equally  great  as  an  ecclesiastical  statesman,  as  theo- 
logian, and  universally  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Roman  people  in 
the  times  of  the  invasions  of  Attila  and  Genseric,  Without  being  the 
creator  of  the  papal  idea,  he  was  able  so  to  gather  up  the  elements  that 
had  been  developed  by  Siricius,  Innocent,  and  others,  as  to  give  it  a 
classical  expression  that  almost  warrants  one  in  describing  him  as  the 
first  of  the  popes  in  the  later  sense  of  that  term.  His  Hterary  remains 
consist  of  sermons,  of  which  ninety-six  are  genuine,  in  which,  among 
other  matters,  he  sets  forth  his  conception  of  the  Petrine  prerogative 
(see  below,  §  87,  &),  and  letters  in  which  he  deals  with  the  largest  ques- 
tions of  ecclesiastical  politics,  especially  in  the  matter  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  Monophysitism  at  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.     See  below,  §  91. 

Our  search  has  discovered  in  the  city  a  great  many  follow- 
ers and  teachers  of  the  Manichaean  impiety,  our  watchfulness 
has  proclaimed  them,  and  our  authority  and  censure  have 


SOLE  AUTHORITY  OF  STATE   CHURCH      377 

checked  them:  those  whom  we  could  reform  we  have  cor- 
rected and  driven  to  condemn  Manichasus  with  his  preachings 
and  teachings,  by  public  confession  in  the  Church,  and  by  the 
subscription  of  their  own  hands;  and  thus  we  have  lifted 
those  who  have  acknowledged  their  fault  from  the  pit  of  their 
impiety,  by  granting  them  opportunity  for  repentance.  But 
some  who  had  so  deeply  involved  themselves  that  no  remedy 
could  assist  them  have  been  subjected  to  the  laws,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  constitutions  of  our  Christian  princes,  and  lest 
they  should  pollute  the  holy  flock  by  their  contagion,  have 
been  banished  into  perpetual  exile  by  the  public  judges. 
And  all  the  profane  and  disgraceful  things  which  are  found, 
as  well  in  their  writings  as  in  their  secret  traditions,  we  have 
disclosed  and  clearly  proved  to  the  eyes  of  Christian  laity, 
that  the  people  might  know  what  to  shrink  from  or  avoid ;  so 
that  he  that  was  called  their  bishop  was  himself  tried  by  us 
and  betrayed  the  criminal  views  which  he  held  in  his  mystic 
religion,  as  the  record  of  our  proceedings  can  show  you.  For 
this,  too,  we  have  sent  you  for  instruction;  and  after  reading 
them  you  will  be  able  to  understand  all  the  discoveries  we 
have  made. 

And  because  we  know  that  some  of  those  who  are  involved 
here  in  too  close  an  accusation  for  them  to  clear  themselves 
have  fled,  we  have  sent  this  letter  to  you,  beloved,  by  our 
acolyte;  that  your  holiness,  dear  brothers,  may  be  informed 
of  this,  and  see  fit  to  act  more  diligently  and  cautiously,  lest 
the  men  of  Manichaean  error  be  able  to  find  opportunity  of 
hurting  your  people  and  of  teaching  these  impious  doctrines. 
For  we  cannot  otherwise  rule  those  intrusted  to  us  unless  we 
pursue,  with  the  zeal  of  faith  in  the  Lord,  those  who  are  de- 
stroyers and  destroyed;  and  with  what  severity  we  can  bring 
to  bear,  cut  them  off  from  intercourse  with  sound  minds,  lest 
this  pestilence  spread  much  wider.  Wherefore  I  exhort  you, 
beloved,  I  beseech  and  warn  you  to  use  such  watchful  diligence 
as  you  ought  and  can  employ  in  tracking  them  out  lest  they 
find  opportunity  of  concealment  anywhere. 


378  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

(g)  Leo  the  Great,  Epistula  15.     (MSL,  54  :  680.) 

An  account  of  the  tenets  of  the  Priscillianists.  Leo  is  answering  a 
letter  sent  him  by  Bishop  Turribius  of  Asturia,  in  which  that  bishop 
had  given  him  statements  about  the  faith  of  these  sectaries.  It  ap- 
pears that  these  statements  which  Leo  quotes  and  refutes  in  brief  are 
not  wholly  correct  and  that  the  Priscillianists  were  far  from  being  as 
heretical  as  they  have  been  commonly  represented.  See  articles  in 
the  recent  encyclopaedias,  e.  g.,  New  Schaff-Herzog,  and  Encyclopaedia 
Britannica,  nth  ed.  The  change  in  opinion  is  due  to  the  discovery 
of  writings  of  Priscillian  himself.  Nevertheless,  these  statements,  de- 
fective as  they  may  be,  represent  the  opinion  of  the  times  as  to  these 
heretics  and  the  general  attitude  toward  what  was  regarded  as  hereti- 
cal and  savoring  of  Manichaeanism.^ 

1.  And  so  under  the  first  head  is  shown  what  impious 
views  they  hold  about  the  divine  Trinity;  they  affirm  that 
the  person  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  is  one 
and  the  same,  as  if  the  same  God  were  named  now  Father,  now 
Son,  now  Holy  Ghost;  and  as  if  He  who  begat  were  not  one, 
He  who  was  begotten  another,  and  He  who  proceedeth 
from  both  yet  another;  but  an  undivided  unity  must  be 
understood,  spoken  of  under  three  names,  but  not  consisting 
of  three  persons.  .  .  . 

2.  Under  the  second  head  is  displayed  their  foolish  and 
empty  fancy  about  the  issue  of  certain  virtues  from  God 
which  He  began  to  possess,  and  which  were  posterior  to  God 
in  His  own  essence.  .  .  . 

3.  Again  the  language  of  the  third  head  shows  that  these 
same  impious  persons  assert  that  the  Son  of  God  is  called 
"only  begotten"  for  this  reason  that  He  alone  was  born  of 
a  virgin.  .  .  . 

4.  The  fourth  head  deals  with  the  fact  that  the  birthday 
of  Christ,  which  the  Catholic  Church  venerates  as  His  tak- 
ing on  Him  the  true  man,  because  "the  Word  became  flesh 
and  dwelt  among  us,"  is  not  truly  honored  by  these  men,  but 
they  pretend  that  they  honor  it,  for  they  fast  on  that  day, 
as  they  do  also  on  the  Lord's  Day,  which  is  the  day  of  Christ's 

^  For  further  detail  of  the  history  of  the  Priscillianists,  see  Sulpicius  Severus, 
Sacred  History,  II,  46-51.     (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XI.) 


SOLE  AUTHORITY  OF  STATE  CHURCH      379 

resurrection.  No  doubt  they  do  this  because  they  do  not 
believe  that  Christ  the  Lord  was  truly  born  in  man's  nature, 
but  maintain  that  by  a  sort  of  illusion  there  was  an  appear- 
ance of  what  was  not  a  reahty. 

5.  Their  fifth  head  refers  to  their  assertion  that  man's 
soul  is  a  part  of  the  divine  substance,  and  that  the  nature  of 
our  human  state  does  not  differ  from  its  Creator's  nature.  .  .  . 

6.  The  sixth  points  out  that  they  say  that  the  devil  never 
was  good  and  that  his  nature  is  not  God's  handiwork,  but 
that  he  came  forth  of  chaos  and  darkness.  ... 

7.  In  the  seventh  place  follows  that  they  condemn  mar- 
riage and  are  horrified  at  begetting  children,  in  which,  as  in 
nearly  all  things,  they  agree  with  the  profanity  of  the  Mani- 
chaeans. 

8.  Their  eighth  point  is  that  the  formation  of  men's  bodies 
is  the  device  of  the  devil  and  that  the  seed  of  conception  is 
shaped  by  the  aid  of  demons  in  the  womb.  .  .  . 

9.  The  ninth  notice  declares  that  they  say  that  the  sons 
of  promise  are  born,  indeed,  of  women,  conceived  by  the  Holy 
Spirit;  lest  the  offspring  that  is  born  of  carnal  seed  should 
seem  to  share  in  God's  estate.  .  .  . 

10.  Under  the  tenth  head  they  are  reported  as  asserting 
that  the  souls  which  are  placed  in  men's  bodies  have  previously 
been  without  a  body  and  have  sinned  in  their  heavenly  hab- 
itation and  for  this  reason  have  fallen  from  their  high  estate 
to  a  lower  one  alighting  upon  ruling  spirits  of  divers  qualities, 
and  after  passing  through  a  succession  of  powers  of  the  air 
and  stars,  some  fiercer,  some  milder,  are  enclosed  in  bodies 
of  different  sorts  and  conditions,  so  that  whatever  variety  and 
inequality  is  meted  out  to  us  in  this  life,  seems  the  result  of 
previous  causes.  .  .  . 

11.  Their  eleventh  blasphemy  is  that  in  which  they  sup- 
pose that  both  the  souls  and  bodies  of  men  are  under  the 
influence  of  fatal  stars.  .  .  . 

12.  The  twelfth  of  these  points  is  this:  that  they  map  out 
the  parts  of  the  soul  under  certain  powers  and  the  limbs  under 


38o  THE   IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

others;  and  they  suggest  the  characters  of  the  inner  powers 
that  rule  the  soul  by  giving  them  the  names  of  the  patriarchs; 
and  on  the  other  hand,  they  attribute  the  signs  of  the  stars 
to  those  under  which  they  put  the  body. 

§  74.    The  Position  of  the  State  Church  in  the  Social 
Order  of  the  Empire 

The  elevation  of  the  Church  exposed  the  Church  to  world- 
liness  whereby  selfish  men,  or  men  carried  away  with  par- 
tisan zeal,  took  advantages  of  its  privileges  or  contended 
fiercely  for  important  appointments.  The  clergy  all  too  fre- 
quently ingratiated  themselves  with  wealthy  members  of 
their  flocks  that  they  might  receive  from  them  valuable 
legacies,  an  abuse  which  had  to  be  corrected  by  civil  law; 
factional  spirit  occasionally  led  to  bloodshed  in  episcopal 
elections.  But  on  the  other  hand  the  Church  was  employed 
by  the  State  in  an  important  work  which  properly  belonged 
to  the  secular  administration,  viz.,  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice in  the  episcopal  courts  of  arbitration,  for  which  see  Cod. 
Just. J  I,  tit.  3,  de  Episcopali  Audientia;  cf.  E.  Loening,  Ge- 
schichte  des  deutschen  Kirchenrechts,  vol.  I;  and  in  the  super- 
vision of  civil  officials  in  the  expenditures  of  funds  for  public 
improvements.  These  are  but  instances  of  their  large  public 
activity  according  to  law. 

(a)  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  Hist.  Rom.,  XXVII,  3,  §§  12  ff. 
Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  607/. 

Damasus  and  Ursinus. 

The  strife  which  attained  shocking  proportions  in  connection  with 
the  election  of  Damasus  seems  to  have  been  connected  with  the  schism 
at  Rome  occasioned  by  the  attitude  of  Liberius  in  the  Arian  contro- 
versy. Damasus  proved  one  of  the  ablest  bishops  that  Rome  ever 
had  in  the  ancient  Church.  For  aid  in  overcoming  the  partisans  of 
Ursinus  a  Roman  council  appealed  to  the  Emperor  Gratian,  whose 
answer  is  given  in  part  above,  §  72,  e. 

12.  Damasus  and  Ursinus,  being  both  immoderately  eager 
to  obtain  the  bishopric,  formed  parties  and  carried  on  the 


POSITION  OF  THE   STATE   CHURCH         381 

conflict  with  great  asperity,  the  partisans  of  each  carrying 
their  violence  to  actual  battle,  in  which  men  were  wounded 
and  killed.  And  as  Juventius,  prefect  of  the  city,  was  un- 
able to  put  an  end  to  it,  or  even  to  soften  these  disorders,  he 
was  at  last  by  their  violence  compelled  to  withdraw  to  the 
suburbs. 

13.  Ultimately  Damasus  got  the  best  of  the  strife  by  the 
strenuous  efforts  of  his  partisans.  It  is  certain  that  on  one 
day  one  hundred  and  thirty-seven  dead  bodies  were  found  in 
the  Basilica  of  Sicinus,  which  is  a  Christian  church.  And 
the  populace  who  had  thus  been  roused  to  a  state  of  ferocity 
were  with  great  difhculty  restored  to  order. 

14.  I  do  not  deny,  when  I  consider  the  ostentation  that 
reigns  at  Rome,  that  those  who  desire  such  rank  and  power 
may  be  justified  in  laboring  with  all  possible  exertion  and 
vehemence  to  obtain  their  wishes;  since  after  they  have  suc- 
ceeded, they  will  be  secure  for  the  future,  being  enriched  by 
offerings  of  matrons,  riding  in  carriages,  dressing  splendidly, 
and  feasting  luxuriously,  so  that  their  entertainments  surpass 
even  royal  banquets. 

15.  And  they  might  be  really  happy  if,  despising  the  vast- 
ness  of  the  city  which  they  excite  against  themselves  by  their 
vices,  they  were  to  live  in  imitation  of  some  of  the  priests  in 
the  provinces,  whom  the  most  rigid  abstinence  in  eating  and 
drinking,  and  plainness  of  apparel,  and  eyes  always  cast  on 
the  ground,  recommend  to  the  everlasting  Deity  and  His  true 
worshippers  as  pure  and  sober-minded  men. 

(b)  Codex  TheodosianuSj  XVI,  2,  20;  A.  D.  370.     Cf.  Kirch, 

n.  759- 

The  following  law  is  only  one  of  several  designed  to  correct  what 
threatened  to  become  an  intolerable  abuse. 

Ecclesiastics  and  those  who  wish  to  be  known  by  the  name 
of  the  continent  ^  are  not  to  come  into  possession  of  the  houses 
of  widows  and  orphan  girls,  but  are  to  be  put  aside  by  pubhc 

^  /.  e.,  ascetics  and  monks. 


382  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

courts  if  afterward  the  affines  and  near  relatives  of  such  think 
that  they  ought  to  be  put  away.  Also  we  decree  that  the 
aforesaid  may  acquire  nothing  whatsoever  from  the  liberality 
of  that  woman  to  whom  privately,  under  the  cloak  of  religion, 
they  have  attached  themselves,  or  from  her  last  will;  and  all 
shall  be  of  no  effect  which  has  been  left  by  one  of  these  to 
them,  they  shall  not  be  able  to  receive  anything  by  way  of 
donation  or  testament  from  a  person  in  subjection.  But  if, 
by  chance,  after  the  warning  of  our  law,  these  women  shall 
think  something  is  to  be  left  to  them  by  way  of  donation  or  in 
their  last  will,  let  it  be  seized  by  the  lisc.  But  if  they  should 
receive  anything  by  the  will  of  those  women  in  succession  to 
whom  or  to  whose  goods  they  have  the  support  of  the 7^5  civile 
or  the  benefit  of  the  edict,  let  them  take  it  as  relatives. 

(c)  Codex  Theodosianus,  I,  27,  2;  A.  D.  408. 

Edict  of  Arcadius,  Honorius,  and  Theodosius  II  concerning  the 
Audientia  Episcopalis. 

According  to  Roman  law  many  cases  were  frequently  decided  by  an 
arbitrator,  according  to  an  agreement  between  the  litigants.  The 
bishops  had  long  acted  as  such  in  many  cases  among  Christians.  As 
they  did  not  always  decide  suits  on  authorization  by  the  courts,  their 
decisions  did  not  have  binding  authority  in  all  cases.  But  after'Con- 
stantine's  recognition  of  the  Church  they  were  given  authority  to 
decide  cases,  and  according  to  an  edict  of  2,33  their  decisions  were  bind- 
ing even  if  only  one  litigant  appealed  to  his  judgment.  But  this  was 
reduced  to  cases  in  which  there  was  an  agreement  between  the  parties. 
The  following  law,  the  earliest  extant,  though  probably  not  the  earliest, 
may  be  found,  curtailed  by  the  omission  of  the  second  sentence,  in 
Cod.  Just.,  I,  4,  8. 

An  episcopal  judgment  shall  be  binding  upon  all  who  chose 
to  be  heard  by  the  priests.^  For  since  private  persons  may 
hear  cases  between  those  who  consent,  even  without  the 
knowledge  of  the  judges,  we  suffer  it  to  be  permitted  them. 
That  respect  is  to  be  shown  their  decisions  which  is  re- 
quired to  be  shown  your  authority ,2  from  which  there  is  no 

^Priest,  sacerdos,  is  here  used,  as  so  often,  not  for  presbyter  but  for  bishop. 
2  As  this  was  addressed  to  Theodorus,  the  praetorian  prefect,  the  authority 
of  the  decision  is  rendered  of  the  highest  character. 


POSITION  OF  THE   STATE   CHURCH         383 

appeal.  By  the  court  and  the  officials  execution  is  to  be 
given  the  sentence,  so  that  the  episcopal  judicial  examination 
may  not  be  rendered  void. 

{d)  Codex  Theodosiamis,  II,  i,  10;  A.  D.  398. 

Law  of  Arcadius  and  Honorius. 

The  following  law  is  cited  to  show  that  in  the  legalization  of  the 
Audientia  Episcopalis  the  legislation  followed  a  principle  that  was  not 
peculiar  to  the  position  of  the  Church  as  the  State  Church.  The  Jews 
had  a  similar  privilege.  The  conditions  under  which  their  religious 
authorities  could  act  as  arbitrators  were  similar  to  that  in  which  the 
bishops  acted.     This  edict  can  also  be  found  in  Cod.  Just.,  I,  9,  8. 

Jews  living  at  Rome,  according  to  common  right,  are  in 
those  cases  which  do  not  pertain  to  their  superstition,  their 
court,  laws,  and  rights,  to  attend  the  courts  of  justice,  and  are 
to  bring  and  defend  legal  actions  according  to  the  Roman 
laws;  hereafter  let  them  be  under  our  laws.  If,  indeed,  any 
by  agreement  similar  to  that  for  the  appointment  of  arbi- 
trators, decide  that  the  litigation  be  before  the  Jews  or  the 
patriarchs  by  the  consent  of  both  parties  and  in  business  of 
a  purely  civil  character,  they  are  not  forbidden  by  pubHc 
law  to  choose  their  courts  of  justice;  and  let  the  provincial 
judges  execute  their  decisions  as  if  the  arbitrators  had  been 
assigned  them  by  the  sentence  of  a  judge. 

(e)  Codex  Justinianiis,  I,  4,  26. 

The  following  law  of  the  Emperor  Justinian,  A.  D.  530,  is  one  of 
many  showing  the  way  in  which  the  bishops  were  employed  in  many 
duties  of  the  State  which  hardly  fell  to  their  part  as  ecclesiastics. 

With  respect  to  the  yearly  affairs  of  cities,  whether  they 
concern  the  ordinary  revenues  of  the  city,  either  from  funds 
derived  from  the  property  of  the  city,  or  from  legacies  and 
private  gifts,  or  given  or  received  from  other  sources,  whether 
for  public  works,  or  for  provisions,  or  public  aqueducts,  or 
the  maintenance  of  baths  or  ports,  or  the  construction  of 
walls  and  towers,  or  the  repairing  of  bridges  and  roads,  or 
for  trials  in  which  the  city  may  be  engaged  in  reference  to 
public  or  private  interests,  we  decree  as  follows:  The  very 


384  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

pious  bishop  and  three  men  of  good  reputation,  in  every  re- 
spect the  first  men  of  the  city,  shall  meet  and  each  year  not 
only  examine  the  work  done,  but  take  care  that  those  who  con- 
duct them  or  have  been  conducting  them,  shall  manage  them 
with  exactness,  shall  render  their  accounts,  and  show  by  the 
production  of  the  public  records  that  they  have  duly  per- 
formed their  engagements  in  the  administration  of  the  sums 
appropriated  for  provisions,  or  baths,  or  for  the  expenses 
involved  in  the  maintenance  of  roads,  aqueducts,  or  any  other 
work. 

§  75.    Social  Significance  of  the  State  Church 

The  Church  at  no  time  degenerated  into  a  mere  department 
of  the  State.  In  spite  of  the  worldly  passions  that  invaded 
it  and  the  dissensions  that  distracted  it,  the  Church  remained 
mindful  of  its  duty  as  not  merely  a  guardian  of  the  deposit  of 
faith  but  as  a  school  of  Christian  morality.  This  was  the 
principle  of  the  penitential  discipline  of  the  ante-Nicene  period. 
It  was  saved  from  becoming  a  mere  form,  or  lost  altogether  by 
the  custom  which  became  general  after  400,  of  having  the 
confession  of  sin  made  in  private.  In  matters  of  great  moral 
concern,  such  as  the  treatment  of  slaves,  marriage,  and  di- 
vorce, and  the  cruel  sports  of  the  arena,  the  Church  was  able 
to  exert  its  influence  and  eventually  bring  about  a  change  in 
the  law.  And  in  standing  for  righteousness,  instances  were 
not  lacking  when  the  highest  were  rebuked  by  the  Church, 
as  in  the  great  case  of  Ambrose  and  Theodosius. 

(a)  Leo  the  Gresitj  Epistula  168,  ch.  2.  (MSL,  54  :  1210.) 
Cf.  Denziger,  n.  145. 

Confession  should  no  longer  be  public,  but  only  private.  From  the 
tone  of  the  letter  it  would  appear  that  private  confession  had  been  cus- 
tomary for  some  time  and  that  public  confession  had  so  far  ^one  out 
of  use  as  to  appear  as  a  novelty.     V.  supra,  §  42. 

I  direct  that  that  presumptuous  violation  of  the  apostolic 
rule  be  entirely  done  away,  which  we  have  recently  learned 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  STATE   CHURCH         385 

has  been  without  warrant  committed  by  some;  namely, 
concerning  penance,  which  is  demanded  of  the  faithful,  that 
a  written  confession  in  a  schedule  concerning  the  nature  of 
each  particular  sin  be  not  recited  publicly,  since  it  suffices 
that  the  guilt  of  conscience  be  made  known  by  a  secret  con- 
fession to  the  priests  alone.  Although  that  fulness  of  faith 
appears  to  be  laudable  which  on  account  of  the  fear  of  God 
is  not  afraid  to  blush  before  men,  yet  because  the  sins  of  all 
are  not  such  that  those  who  demand  penance  would  not  be 
afraid  to  pubHsh  them,  let  a  custom  so  objectionable  be  done 
away;  that  many  may  not  be  deterred  from  the  remedies 
of  penitence,  since  they  are  ashamed  or  are  afraid  to  disclose 
their  deed  to  their  enemies,  by  which  they  might  be  ruined 
by  the  requirements  of  the  laws.  For  that  confession  suffices 
which  is  first  offered  to  God,  then  further  to  the  priest,  who 
intervenes  as  with  intercessions  for  the  sins  of  the  penitent. 
In  this  way  many  can  be  brought  to  penitence  if  the  bad  con- 
science of  the  one  making  the  confession  is  not  pubUshed  in 
the  ears  of  the  people. 

(b)  Codex  TheodosianuSj  IV,  7,  i;  A.  D.  321.    Cf.  Kirch, 

n.  749. 

Edict  of  Constantine  granting  the  privilege  of  manumission  to  take 
place  in  churches. 

The  Church  does  not  seem  to  have  been  opposed  to  slavery  as  an 
institution.  It  recognized  it  as  a  part  of  the  social  order,  following  the 
advice  of  St.  Paul.  But,  at  the  same  time,  also  following  his  advice, 
it  endeavored  to  inculcate  Christian  love  in  the  treatment  of  slaves, 
and  legislated  frequently  on  the  matter.  The  edict  of  Constantine  was 
in  favor  of  this  humane  teaching  of  the  Church  to  the  extent  that  it 
enabled  it  to  forward  the  tendency  toward  manumission  of  slaves, 
which  the  Church  taught  as  a  pious  act.  This  edict  is  to  be  found  in 
Cod,  Just.,  I,  13,  2. 

Those  who  from  the  motives  of  rehgion  shall  give  deserved 
liberty  to  their  slaves  in  the  midst  of  the  Church  shall  be 
regarded  as  having  given  the  same  with  the  same  legal  force 
as  that  by  which  Roman  citizenship  has  been  customarily 
given  with  the  traditional  solemn  rites.     But  this  is  permitted 


386  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

only  to  those  who  give  this  Kberty  in  the  presence  of  the 
priest.  But  to  the  clergy  we  concede  more,  so  that,  when 
they  give  liberty  to  their  slaves,  they  may  be  said  to  have 
granted  a  full  enjoyment  of  liberty,  not  merely  in  the  face  of 
the  Church  and  the  religious  people,  but  also,  when  in  their 
last  disposition  of  their  effects  they  shall  have  given  liberty 
or  shall  direct  by  any  words  whatsoever  that  it  be  given,  on 
the  day  of  the  publication  of  their  will  liberty,  without  any 
witness  or  intervention  of  the  law,  shall  belong  to  them  im- 
mediately. 

(c)  Canons  bearing  on  Slavery: 

Synod  of  Elvira,  A.  D.  309,  Canon  5,  Bruns,  II,  i. 

If  a  mistress  seized  with  furious  passion  beat  her  female 
slave  with  whips  so  that  within  three  days  she  gives  up  her 
soul  in  suffering,  inasmuch  as  it  is  uncertain  whether  she 
killed  her  wilfully  or  by  chance,  let  her,  if  it  was  done  wil- 
fully, be  readmitted  after  seven  years,  when  the  lawful  pen- 
ance has  been  accomplished;  or  after  the  space  of  five  years 
if  it  was  by  chance;  but  if  she  should  become  ill  during  the 
appointed  time,  let  her  receive  the  communion. 

Synod  of  Gangra,  A.  D.  343,  Canon  3,  Bruns,  I,  107. 

If  any  one,  under  the  pretence  of  piety,  advises  a  slave  to 
despise  his  master  and  run  away  from  his  service  and  not 
with  good  will  and  full  respect  serve  his  master,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

Synod  of  Agde,  A.  D.  509,  Canon  7,  Bruns,  II,  147. 

As  slaves  were  a  valuable  possession,  bishops  could  no  more  alienate 
them  than  any  other  property,  or  only  under  the  same  conditions. 
This  canon  lays  down  principles  generally  followed  in  the  relation  of 
the  Church  toward  the  unfree  of  every  sort  on  lands  belonging  to  the 
endowments  of  the  Church. 

The  bishops  should  possess  the  houses  and  slaves  of  the 
Church  in  a  faithful  manner  and  without  diminishing  the 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF   STATE   CHURCH  387 

right  of  the  Church,  as  the  primitive  authorities  direct,  and 
also  the  vessels  of  their  ministry  as  intrusted  to  them.  That 
is,  they  should  not  presume  to  sell  nor  alienate  by  any  con- 
tracts those  things  from  which  the  poor  live.  If  necessity 
requires  that  something  should  be  disposed  of  either  as  a  usu- 
fruct^ or  in  direct  sale,  let  the  case  be  first  shown  before  two  or 
three  bishops  of  the  same  province  or  neighborhood,  as  to  why 
it  is  necessary  to  sell;  and  after  the  priestly  discussion  has  taken 
place,  let  the  sale  which  was  made  be  confirmed  by  their  sub- 
scription; otherwise  the  sale  or  transaction  made  shall  not 
have  validity.  If  the  bishop  bestows  upon  any  deserving 
slaves  of  the  Church  their  liberty,  let  the  liberty  that  has  been 
conferred  be  respected  by  his  successors,  together  with  that 
which  the  manumitter  gave  them  when  they  were  freed;  and 
we  command  them  to  hold  twenty  solidi  in  value  in  fields, 
vineyards,  and  dwellings;  what  shall  have  been  given  more 
the  Church  shall  reclaim  after  the  death  of  the  one  who 
manumitted.^  But  Httle  things  and  things  of  less  utility  to 
the  Church  we  permit  to  be  given  to  strangers  and  clergy  for 
their  usufruct,  the  right  of  the  Church  being  maintained. 

{d)  Apostolic  Constitutions,  IV,  6.     (MSG,  i  :  812.) 

Cruelty  to  slaves  was  placed  upon  the  same  moral  level  as  cruelty 
and  oppression  of  other  weak  and  defenceless  people. 

The  Apostolic  Constitutions  form  an  elaborate  treatise  upon  the 
Church  and  its  organization  in  eight  books,  which  appear,  according 
to  the  consensus  of  modern  scholars,  to  belong  to  the  early  part  of  the 
fifth  century.  The  Apostolic  Canons  are  eighty-five  canons  appended 
to  the  eighth  book. 

Now  the  bishop  ought  to  know  whose  oblations  he  ought  to 
receive,  and  whose  he  ought  not.  For  he  is  to  avoid  corrupt 
dealers  and  not  receive  their  gifts.  ...  He  is  also  to  avoid 
those  that  oppress  the  widow  and  overbear  the  orphan,  and 

1  In  a  usufruct  the  title  remained  with  the  grantor,  and  the  grantee  merely 
had  the  use  or  enjoyment  of  the  land. 

2  On  the  principle  that  one  who  had  a  life  interest  in  property  (and  only  such 
the  bishop  had)  could  alienate  for  a  period  not  extending  beyond  his  natural 
life. 


388  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

fill  the  prisons  with  the  innocent,  and  abuse  their  own  slaves 
wickedly,  I  mean  with  stripes  and  hunger  and  hard  service. 

(e)  Apostolic  Canons,  Canon  8i,  Bruns,  I,  12. 

This  deals  with  the  question  of  the  ordination  of  a  slave.  Later,  if 
a  slave  was  ordained  without  his  master's  consent,  the  ordination  held, 
but  the  bishop  was  obliged  to  pay  the  price  of  the  slave  to  his  master. 
Cf.  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  511,  Can.  8. 

We  do  not  permit  slaves  to  be  ordained  to  the  clergy  with- 
out their  masters'  consent;  for  this  would  wrong  those  that 
owned  them.  For  such  a  practice  would  occasion  the  sub- 
version of  famines.  But  if  at  any  time  a  servant  appears 
worthy  to  be  ordained  to  a  high  office,  such  as  Onesimus  ap- 
pears to  have  been,  and  if  his  master  allows  it,  and  gives  him 
his  freedom,  and  dismisses  him  free  from  his  house,  let  him 
be  ordained. 

(/■)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Montanam  et  Thomam. 
(MSL,  77 :  803.) 

Gregory  and  others  approved  of  manumission  of  slaves  as  an  act  of 
self-denial,  for  therein  a  man  surrendered  what  belonged  to  him,  as 
in  almsgiving;  but  he  and  others  also  justified  the  practice  of  manu- 
mission upon  lines  that  recall  Stoic  ideas  of  man's  natural  freedom. 
Yet,  at  the  same  time,  Gregory  could  insist  upon  the  strict  discipline 
of  slaves  in  the  administration  of  the  Church  property. 

The  following  is  a  letter  of  manumission  addressed  apparently  to  a 
man  and  his  wife. 

Since  our  Redeemer,  the  Maker  of  every  creature,  vouch- 
safed to  assume  human  flesh  for  this  end,  that  when  by  the 
grace  of  His  divinity  the  chain  of  slavery  wherewith  we  were 
held  had  been  broken  He  might  restore  us  to  our  pristine 
liberty,  it  is  a  salutary  deed  if  men,  whom  nature  originally 
produced  free,  and  whom  the  law  of  nations  has  subjected  to 
the  yoke  of  slavery,  be  restored  by  the  benefit  of  manumission 
to  the  liberty  in  which  they  were  born.  And  so  moved  by 
loving-kindness  and  consideration  of  the  case,  we  make  you 
Montana  and  Thomas,  slaves  of  the  holy  Roman  Church, 
which  with  the  help  of  God  we  serve,  free  from  this  day  and 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  STATE   CHURCH         389 

Roman  citizens,  and  we  release  to  you  all  your  private  prop- 
erty.^ 

(g)  Codex  Theodosianus,  XV,  12,  i;  A.  D.  325.  Cf.  Kirch, 
n.  754- 

Constitution  of  Constantine  regarding  gladiatorial  shows. 

This  edict  was  by  no  means  enforced  everywhere.  In  a  shorter 
form  it  passed  into  the  Cod.  Just.  (XI,  44,  i),  but  only  after  the  edict 
of  Honorius  had  stopped  these  shows. 

Bloody  spectacles  are  not  pleasing  in  civil  rest  and  domes- 
tic tranquillity.  Wherefore  we  altogether  prohibit  them  to 
be  gladiators^  who,  it  may  be,  for  their  crimes  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  receive  this  penalty  and  sentence,  and  you  shall 
cause  them  rather  to  serve  in  the  mines,  that  without  blood 
they  may  pay  the  penalty  of  their  crimes. 

(h)  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  26.     (MSG,  82  :  1256.) 

Honorius,  who  had  inherited  the  Empire  of  Europe,  put  a 
stop  to  gladiatorial  combats,  which  had  long  been  held  in 
Rome,  and  he  did  this  under  the  following  circumstances. 
There  was  a  certain  man  named  Telemachus  who  had  em- 
braced the  ascetic  life.  He  had  set  out  for  the  East  and  for 
this  reason  had  repaired  to  Rome.  There,  when  the  abom- 
inable spectacle  was  being  exhibited,  he  went  himself  into 
the  stadium,  and  stepping  down  into  the  arena  endeavored 
to  stop  the  men  who  were  wielding  their  weapons  against  one 
another.  The  spectators  of  the  slaughter  were  indignant 
and,  inspired  by  the  mad  fury  of  the  demon  who  delights  in 
these  bloody  deeds,  stoned  the  peacemaker  to  death.  When 
the  admirable  Emperor  was  informed  of  this  he  numbered 
Telemachus  in  the  army  of  the  victorious  martyrs,  and  put 
an  end  to  that  impious  practice. 

(i)  Ambrose,  Ep.  51.     (MSL,  16  :  12 10.)     Cf.  Kirch,  nn. 

754/. 

^  The  pecuHum  of  the  slave,  property  which  he  was  allowed  to  possess  but 
only  by  the  sufferance  of  the  master. 

2  The  Constitution  ends  here  in  Justinian's  collection. 


390  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

Letter  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius  after  the  massacre  at  Thessa- 
lonica  in  390. 

The  Emperor  had  ordered  a  general  massacre  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Thessalonica  because  of  a  sedition  there.  Ambrose  wrote  to  him  the 
following  letter  after  having  pleaded  in  vain  with  him  before  the 
.massacre  to  deal  mercifully  with  the  people.  (The  well-known  story 
of  the  penitence  of  Theodosius  may  be  found  in  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec, 
V,  17.)  His  residence  at  the  seat  of  the  imperial  government  at  that 
time,  Milan,  made  him  the  chief  adviser  to  the  court  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  the  Arian  influence  was  strong  at  court,  as  the  empress 
mother  Justina  was  an  Arian,  cf.  Ambrose,  Ep.  20,  21.  (PNF,  ser.  II, 
vol.  X.) 

4.  Listen,  august  Emperor,  I  cannot  deny  that  you  have 
a  zeal  for  the  faith;  I  confess  that  you  have  the  fear  of  God. 
But  you  have  a  natural  vehemence,  which,  if  any  one  endeav- 
ors to  soothe  it,  you  quickly  turn  to  mercy;  and  if  any  one 
stirs  it  up,  you  allow  it  to  be  roused  so  much  that  you  can 
scarcely  restrain  it.  Would  that  it  might  be  that,  if  no  one 
soothed  it,  at  least  no  one  inflamed  it.  To  yourself  I  willingly 
intrust  it,  restrain  yourself  and  overcome  your  natural  vehe- 
mence by  the  love  of  piety.  ... 

6.  There  took  place  in  the  city  of  the  Thessalonians  that 
of  which  no  memory  recalls  the  like,  which  I  was  not  able  to 
prevent  taking  place;  which,  indeed,  I  had  before  said,  would 
be  most  atrocious  when  I  so  often  petitioned  concerning  it^ 
and  which  as  you  yourself  show,  by  revoking  it  too  late, 
you  consider  to  be  grave,  and  this  I  could  not  extenuate 
when  committed.  .  .  . 

After  citing  from  the  Bible  several  cases  of  kings  exhibiting  pen- 
ance for  sins,  Ambrose  continues: 

II.  I  have  written  this,  not  to  confound  you,  but  that  the 
examples  of  kings  may  stir  you  up  to  put  away  this  sin  from 
your  kingdom,  for  you  will  put  it  away  by  humbling  your  soul 
before  God.  You  are  a  man,  temptation  has  come  to  you; 
conquer  it.  Sin  is  not  done  away  but  by  tears  and  penitence. 
Neither  angel  can  do  it,  nor  archangel.     The  Lord  himself, 

^  C/.  Paulinus,  Vita  Ambros.     MSL.     14  :  37- 


SIGNIFICANCE   OF   STATE   CHURCH         391 

who  alone  can  say  ''I  am  with  you,"  if  we  have  sinned,  does 
not  forgive  any  but  those  who  do  penance. 

12.  I  urge,  I  beg,  I  exhort,  I  warn;  for  it  is  grief  to  me  that 
you  who  were  an  example  of  unheard-of  piety,  who  were  con- 
spicuous for  clemency,  who  would  not  suffer  single  offenders 
to  be  put  in  peril,  should  not  mourn  that  so  many  innocent 
persons  have  perished.  Though  you  have  waged  war  most 
successfully,  though  in  other  matters  too  you  are  worthy  of 
praise,  yet  piety  was  ever  the  crown  of  your  actions.  The 
devil  envied  that  which  you  had  as  a  most  excellent  posses- 
sion. Conquer  him  whilst  you  still  possess  that  wherewith 
you  can  conquer.  Do  not  add  another  sin  to  your  sin  by  a 
course  of  action  which  has  injured  many. 

13.  I,  indeed,  though  a  debtor  to  your  kindness,  for  which 
I  cannot  be  ungrateful,  that  kindness  which  I  regard  as  sur- 
passing that  of  many  emperors,  and  has  been  equalled  by 
one  only,  I  have  no  cause,  I  say,  for  a  charge  of  contumacy 
against  you,  but  have  cause  for  fear.  I  dare  not  offer  the 
sacrifice  if  you  intend  to  be  present.  Is  that  which  is  not 
allowed  after  the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  one  innocent  per- 
son allowed  after  the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  many?  I 
think  not. 

(/)  Codex  Theodosianus,  III,  16,  2;  A.  D.  421. 

The  later  Roman  law  of  divorce. 

The  Roman  law  under  the  Empire  was  extremely  favorable  to  di- 
vorce, making  it  easy  for  either  party  to  become  rid  of  the  other  for 
any  cause  that  seemed  sufficient.  The  Christian  Church  from  the 
first,  following  the  teaching  of  Christ,  opposed  divorce.  Marriage 
was  an  indissoluble  relation;  see  §  39/,  g.  It  was  only  by  degrees  that 
much  change  could  be  introduced  into  the  civil  law.  The  following 
law  of  Theodosius  II  gives  the  condition  of  the  law  in  the  fifth  century. 
It  shows  that  to  some  extent  the  Christian  principles  regarding  mar- 
riage had  affected  legislation. 

If  a  woman  leave  her  husband  by  a  repudiation  made  by 
her  and  prove  no  cause  for  her  divorcing  him,  the  gifts  which 
she  received  as  bride  shall  be  taken  away  and  she  shall  like- 
wise be  deprived  of  her  dowry,  and  be  subjected  to  the  pun- 


392  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

ishment  of  deportation ;  and  to  her  we  deny  not  only  the  right 
of  marriage  with  another  man,  but  also  the  right  of  post- 
liminium.i  g^t  if  the  woman  opposed  to  the  marriage  prove 
faults  of  morals  and  vices,  though  of  no  great  gravity,  let 
her  lose  her  dowry  and  pay  back  to  her  husband  her  marriage 
gift,  and  let  her  never  join  herself  in  marriage  with  another; 
that  she  may  not  stain  her  widowhood  with  the  impudence 
of  unchastity  we  give  the  repudiated  husband  the  right  of 
bringing  an  accusation  by  law.  Hereafter  if  she  who  abandons 
her  husband  prove  grave  causes  and  a  guilt  involving  great 
crimes,  let  her  obtain  a  control  of  her  dowry  and  marriage 
gifts,  and  five  years  after  the  day  of  repudiation  she  shall 
receive  the  right  of  remarrying;  for  it  would  then  appear  that 
she  had  acted  rather  out  of  detestation  of  her  husband  than 
from  desire  after  another.  Likewise,  if  the  husband  bring 
a  divorce  and  charge  grave  crimes  against  the  woman,  let 
him  bring  action  against  the  accused  under  the  laws  and  let 
him  both  have  the  dowry  (sentence  having  been  obtained) 
and  let  him  receive  his  gifts  to  her  and  let  the  free  choice  of 
marrying  another  be  granted  him  immediately.  But  if  it 
is  an  offence  of  manners  and  not  of  a  criminal  nature,  let  him 
receive  the  donations,  relinquish  the  dowry,  and  marry  after 
two  years.  But  if  he  merely  wishes  to  dissolve  the  marriage 
by  dissent,  and  she  who  is  put  away  is  charged  with  no  fault 
or  sin,  let  the  man  lose  the  donation  and  the  dowry,  and  in 
perpetual  celibacy  let  him  bear  as  a  penalty  for  his  wrongful 
divorce  the  pain  of  solitude;  to  the  woman,  however,  is  con- 
ceded after  a  year  the  right  to  remarry.  Regarding  the  re- 
tention of  the  dowry  on  account  of  the  children  we  command 
that  the  directions  of  the  old  law  shall  be  observed. 

(k)  Jerome,  Epistula  78,  ad  Oceanum.   (MSL,  22  :  691.) 

Divorce  and  remarriage. 

The  principle  here  laid  down  by  Jerome  was  that  which  ultimately 
prevailed  in  the  Church  of  the  West,  that  after  divorce  there  could  be 
no  remarriage,  inasmuch  as  the  marriage  bond  was  indissoluble,  though 
the  parties  might  be  separated  by  the  law.     But  another  principle 

*  /.  e.,  of  returning  to  her  former  home  and  condition. 


SIGNIFICANCE   OF  STATE   CHURCH        393 

was  also  made  a  part  of  the  code  of  Christian  morality,  that  what  was 
forbidden  a  woman  was  also  forbidden  a  man,  i.  e.,  the  moral  code  as  to 
chastity  was  the  same  for  both  sexes. 

§  3.  The  Lord  hath  commanded  that  a  wife  should  not 
be  put  away  except  for  fornication;  and  that  when  she  has 
been  put  away,  she  ought  to  remain  unmarried  [Matt. 
19  :g;  I  Cor.  7  :  11].  Whatever  is  given  as  a  commandment 
to  men  logically  applies  to  women  also.  For  it  cannot  be 
that  while  an  adulterous  wife  is  to  be  put  away,  an  incontinent 
husband  must  be  retained.  .  .  .  The  laws  of  Cassar  are  dif- 
ferent, it  is  true,  from  the  laws  of  Christ.  Papinian  com- 
mands one  thing;  our  Paul  another.^  Among  them  the 
bridles  are  loosened  for  immodesty  in  the  case  of  men.  But 
with  us  what  is  unlawful  for  women  is  equally  unlawful  for 
men;  and  both  are  bound  by  the  same  conditions  of  service. 
She^  then  put  away,  as  they  report,  a  husband  that  was  a 
sinner;  she  put  away  one  who  was  guilty  of  this  and  that 
crime.  .  .  .  She  was  a  young  woman;  she  could  not  preserve 
her  widowhood.  .  .  .  She  persuaded  herself  and  thought  that 
her  husband  had  been  lawfully  put  away  from  her.  She  did 
not  know  that  the  strictness  of  the  Gospel  takes  away  from 
women  all  pretexts  for  remarriage,  so  long  as  their  former 
husbands  are  ahve. 

(/)  Jerome,  Adversus  Jovinianum,  I,  7.     (MSL,  23  :  229.) 

The  inferiority  of  marriage  to  virginity. 

While  the  Church  teachers  insisted  on  the  indissolubility  of  mar- 
riage and  its  sanctity,  in  not  a  few  cases  they  depreciated  marriage. 
Of  those  who  did  this  Jerome  may  be  regarded  as  the  most  character- 
istic and  representative  of  a  tendency  which  had  set  in,  largely  in  con- 
nection with  the  increase  of  monasticism,  regarded  as  the  only  form 
of  Christian  perfection. 

*'It  is  good  for  a  man  not  to  touch  a  woman."  ^  If  it  is 
good  not  to  touch  a  woman,  it  is  bad  to  touch  one;  for  noth- 

^I.  e.,  in  distinction  from  Paulus  the  eminent  Roman  lawyer,  a  contempo- 
rary of  Papinian. 

^Fabiola  (cf.  DCB),  on  whose  death  Jerome  is  here  writing  to  her  husband 
Oceanus. 

3  See  I  Cor.  7:1/. 


394  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

ing  is  opposed  to  goodness  but  the  bad.  But  if  it  be  bad 
and  the  evil  is  pardoned,  it  is  conceded  that  a  worse  evil  may 
not  happen.  But  what  sort  of  good  is  that  which  is  allowed 
only  because  there  may  be  something  worse?  He  would  have 
never  added,  "Let  each  man  have  his  own  wife,"  unless  he 
had  previously  said,  ''But  because  of  fornication."  .  .  .  ''De- 
fraud ye  not  one  another,  except  it  be  by  consent  for  a  season, 
that  ye  may  give  yourselves  unto  prayer."  What,  I  pray, 
is  the  quality  of  that  good  thing  which  hinders  prayer,  which 
does  not  allow  the  body  of  Christ  to  be  received?  So  long 
as  I  do  a  husband's  part,  I  fail  in  continency.  The  same 
Apostle  in  another  place  commands  us  to  pray  always.^ 

9.  ''It  is  better  to  marry  than  to  burn."  If  marriage 
itself  be  good,  do  not  compare  it  with  fire,  but  simply  say, 
"It  is  good  to  marry."  I  suspect  the  goodness  of  that  thing 
which  must  be  only  the  lesser  of  two  evils.  What  I  want  is 
not  the  smaller  evil,  but  a  thing  that  is  absolutely  good. 

(m)  Chrysostom,  Horn.  66  in  Matth.  (XX,  30).  (MSG, 
58  :  630.) 

The  Church  took  the  lead  in  philanthropy  and  not  only  organized 
relief  of  poor  but  constantly  exhorted  people  to  contribute  to  the 
cause.     See  above,  §  68,  d. 

If  both  the  wealthy  and  those  next  to  them  in  wealth  were 
to  distribute  among  themselves  those  in  need  of  bread  and 
raiment,  scarcely  would  one  poor  person  fall  to  the  share  of 
fifty  men,  or  even  a  hundred.  Yet,  nevertheless,  though  in 
such  great  abundance  of  persons  able  to  assist  them,  they  are 
wailing  every  day.  And  that  thou  mayest  learn  their  in- 
humanity, recall  that  the  Church^  has  a  revenue  of  one  of 
the  lowest  among  the  wealthy,  and  not  of  the  very  rich;  and 
consider  how  many  widows  it  succors  every  day,  how  many 

1  Cf.  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  398,  Can.  13.  ''When  the  bridegroom  and 
bride  are  to  be  blessed  by  the  priest  they  are  to  be  presented  by  their  parents 
and  paranymphs.  And  let  them  when  they  have  received  the  benediction  re- 
main in  virginity  the  same  night  out  of  reverence  for  the  benediction." 

2/.  e.,  of  Antioch,  where  Chrysostom  was  a  presbyter  and  delivered  these 
homilies. 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF   STATE   CHURCH        395 

virgins;  for  indeed  the  list  of  them  amounts  to  the  number 
of  three  thousand.  Together  with  these  she  succors  them 
that  dwell  in  prison,  the  sick  in  the  caravansaries,  the 
healthy,  those  that  are  absent  from  their  homes,  those  that 
are  maimed  in  their  bodies,  those  that  wait  upon  the  altar; 
and  with  respect  to  food  and  raiment,  those  that  casually 
come  every  day;  and  her  substance  is  in  no  respect  dimin- 
ished. So  that  jf  ten  men  only  were  thus  willing  to  spend, 
there  would  be  no  poor. 

(n)  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Panegyric  on  Basil,  ch.  63. 
(MSG,  36  :  577-) 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus  was  the  friend  and  schoolmate  of  Basil.  The 
action  of  Basil  in  forcing  upon  him  the  bishopric  of  Sasima  led  to  an 
estrangement  and  brought  about  the  tragedy  of  Gregory's  ecclesias- 
tical career,  his  forced  resignation  of  the  archiepiscopal  see  of  Constan- 
tinople. See  Gregory's  oration,  "The  Last  Farewell"  (PNF,  ser.  II, 
vol.  VII,  385).  Nevertheless,  the  death  of  Basil  was  an  occasion  for 
him  to  deliver  his  greatest  oration.  It  was  probably  composed  and 
delivered  several  years  after  Basil's  decease  and  after  Gregory  had 
retired  from  Constantinople  to  his  home  at  Nazianzus. 

Go  forth  a  little  way  from  the  city,  behold  the  New 
City,^  the  storehouse  of  piety  .  .  .  where  disease  is  regarded 
in  a  philosophic  light,  and  disaster  is  thought  to  be  a  bless- 
ing in  disguise,  and  sympathy  is  tested.  Why  should  I 
compare  with  this  work  Thebes  having  the  seven  gates,  and 
the  Egyptian  Thebes  and  the  walls  of  Babylon  .  .  .  and  all 
other  objects  of  men's  wonder  and  of  historic  record,  from  all 
of  which,  except  for  some  slight  glory,  there  was  no  advan- 
tage to  their  founders?  My  subject  is  the  most  wonderful 
of  all,  the  short  road  to  salvation,  the  easiest  ascent  to  heaven.^ 
There  is  no  longer  before  our  eyes  that  terrible  and  piteous 
spectacle  of  men  dead  before  their  death,  in  many  members 
of  their  body  already  dead,  driven  away  from  their  cities  and 
homes  and  public  places  and  fountains,  ay  and  from  their 

^The  name  given  to  the  extensive  charitable  institutions  founded  by  Basil. 
2  For  this  conception  of  the  value  to  the  giver  to  be  found  in  almsgiving,  see 
above,  §  39,  h. 


396  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

dearest  ones,  recognizable  by  their  names  rather  than  by  their 
features.  .  .  .  He,  however,  it  was  who  most  of  all  persuaded 
us  men,  as  being  men,  not  to  despise  men  nor  to  dishonor 
Christ,  the  head  of  all,  by  inhuman  treatment  of  them;  but 
in  the  misfortune  of  others  to  establish  well  our  own  lot 
and  to  lend  to  God  that  mercy,  since  we  ourselves  need 
mercy.  He  did  not  therefore  disdain  to  honor  disease  with 
his  lips;  he  was  noble  and  of  noble  ancestry  and  of  brilliant 
reputation,  but  he  saluted  them  as  brethren,  not  out  of  vain- 
glory, as  some  might  suppose  (for  who  was  so  far  removed 
from  this  feeling?),  but  taking  the  lead  in  approaching  to  tend 
them  in  consequence  of  his  philosophy,  and  so  giving  not  only 
a  speaking  but  also  a  silent  instruction.  Not  only  the  city, 
but  the  country  and  parts  beyond  behave  in  like  manner;  and 
even  the  leaders  of  society  have  vied  with  one  another  in 
their  philanthropy  and  magnanimity  toward  them. 

§  76.    Popular  Piety  and  the  Reception  of  Heathenism 
IN  the  Church 

When  vast  numbers  poured  into  the  Church  in  the  fourth 
century  and  the  profession  of  Christianity  no  longer  involved 
danger,  morals  became  less  austere,  and  the  type  of  piety  be- 
came adapted  to  the  religious  condition  of  those  with  whom 
the  Church  had  now  to  deal.  This  is  shown  in  the  new  place 
that  the  intercession  of  saints  and  the  veneration  of  their 
relics  take  in  the  religious  life  of  the  times.  Yet  these  and 
similar  forms  of  devotion  in  popular  piety  were  not  new  and 
cannot  be  attributed  in  principle  to  any  wholesale  importa- 
tion of  heathenism  into  the  Church,  as  was  charged  at  the 
time  and  often  since.  In  principle,  and  to  some  extent  in 
practice,  they  can  be  traced  to  times  of  persecution  and  dan- 
ger. But,  on  the  other  hand,  no  little  heathenism  was  brought 
into  the  Church  by  those  who  came  into  it  without  any  ade- 
quate preparation  or  real  change  of  religious  feeling.  With 
this  heathenism  the  Church  had  to  struggle,  either  casting  it 


I 


POPULAR  PIETY  AND   HEATHENISM        397 

out  in  whole  or  in  part,  or  rendering  it  as  innocuous  as  possible. 
In  spite  of  all,  many  heathen  superstitions  remained  every- 
where in  Christendom,  though  playing  for  the  most  part 
such  an  inferior  role  as  to  be  negligible  in  the  total  effect. 

Additional  source  material:  Eusebius,  Vita  Constantini  (PNF),  III, 
21,  28;  IV,  38,  39,  54. 

(a)  Ambrose,  De  Viduis,  ch.  9.     (MSL,  16  :  264.) 

The  importance  and  value  of  calling  upon  the  saints  for  their  inter- 
cessions. 

When  Simon's  mother-in-law  was  lying  sick  with  violent 
fever,  Peter  and  Andrew  besought  the  Lord  for  her:  "And  He 
stood  over  her  and  commanded  the  fever  and  it  left  her,  and 
immediately  she  arose  and  ministered  unto  them."  .  .  . 

So  Peter  and  Andrew  prayed  for  the  widow.  Would  that 
there  were  some  one  who  could  so  quickly  pray  for  us,  or 
better  still,  they  who  prayed  for  the  mother-in-law — Peter 
and  Andrew  his  brother.  Then  they  could  pray  for  one  re- 
lated to  them,  now  they  are  able  to  pray  for  us  and  for  all. 
For  you  see  that  one  bound  by  great  sin  is  less  fit  to  pray  for 
herself,  certainly  less  likely  to  obtain  for  herself.  Let  her 
then  make  use  of  others  to  pray  for  her  to  the  Physician.  For 
the  sick,  unless  the  Physician  be  called  to  them  by  the  prayers 
of  others,  cannot  pray  for  themselves.  The  flesh  is  weak, 
the  soul  is  sick  and  hindered  by  the  chains  of  sins,  and  cannot 
direct  its  feeble  steps  to  the  throne  of  that  great  Physician. 
The  angels  must  be  entreated  for  us,  who  have  been  to  us  as 
guardians;  the  martyrs  must  be  entreated  whose  patronage 
we  seem  to  claim  by  a  sort  of  pledge,  the  possession  of  their 
body.  They  can  entreat  for  our  sins,  who,  if  they  had  any 
sins,  washed  them  in  their  own  blood;  for  they  are  the  mar- 
tyrs of  God,  our  leaders,  the  beholders  of  our  life  and  of  our 
actions.  Let  us  not  be  ashamed  to  take  them  as  intercessors 
for  our  weakness,  for  they  themselves  knew  the  weakness  of 
the  body,  even  when  they  overcame. 

(b)  Jerome,  Contra  Vigilantium,  chs.  4/.    (MSL,  23  :  357.) 


398  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

A  defence  of  the  worship  and  practice  of  the  Church,  especially  in 
regard  to  veneration  of  relics  against  the  criticism  of  Vigilantius. 

Jerome's  attack  on  Vigilantius  is  in  many  respects  a  masterpiece  of 
scurrility,  and  unworthy  of  the  abihty  of  the  man.  But  it  is  inval- 
uable as  a  statement  of  the  opinions  of  the  times  regarding  such  mat- 
ters as  the  veneration  of  relics,  the  attitude  toward  the  departed  saints 
and  martyrs,  and  many  other  elements  of  the  popular  religion  which 
have  been  commonly  attributed  to  a  much  later  period. 

Ch.  4.  Among  other  words  of  blasphemy  he  [Vigilantius] 
may  be  heard  to  say:  '^  What  need  is  there  for  you  not  only  to 
reverence  with  so  great  honor  but  even  to  adore  I  know  not 
what,  which  you  carry  about  in  a  little  vessel  and  worship?" 
And  again  in  the  same  book,  ''Why  do  you  adore  by  kissing  a 
bit  of  powder  wrapped  up  in  a  cloth?"  and  further  on,  ''Under 
the  cloak  of  religion  we  see  really  a  heathen  ceremony  intro- 
duced into  the  churches;  while  the  sun  is  shining  heaps  of 
tapers  are  lighted,  and  everywhere  I  know  not  what  paltry- 
bit  of  powder  wrapped  in  a  costly  cloth  is  kissed  and  wor- 
shipped. Great  honor  do  men  of  this  sort  pay  to  the  blessed 
martyrs,  who,  as  they  think,  are  to  be  glorified  by  trumpery 
tapers,  but  to  whom  the  Lamb  who  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
throne,  with  all  the  brightness  of  His  majesty  gives  light. " 

Ch.  5.  .  .  .  Is  the  Emperor  Arcadius  guilty  of  sacrilege, 
who,  after  so  long  a  time,  conveyed  the  bones  of  the  blessed 
Samuel  from  Judaea  to  Thrace?  Are  all  the  bishops  to  be  con- 
sidered not  only  sacrilegious  but  silly  as  well,  who  carried  that 
most  worthless  thing,  dust  and  ashes,  wrapped  in  silk  and  in 
a  golden  vessel?  Are  the  people  of  all  the  churches  fools,  who 
went  to  meet  the  sacred  relics,  and  received  them  with  as 
much  joy  as  if  they  beheld  the  living  prophet  in  the  midst 
of  them,  so  that  there  was  one  great  swarm  of  people  from 
Palestine  to  Chalcedon  and  with  one  voice  the  praises  of 
Christ  resounded?  .  .  . 

Ch.  6.  For  you  say  that  the  souls  of  the  Apostles  and 
martyrs  have  their  abode  either  in  the  bosom  of  Abraham, 
or  in  some  place  of  refreshment,  or  under  the  altar  of  God, 
and  that  they  cannot  leave  their  own  tombs  and  be  present 


POPULAR  PIETY  AND   HEATHENISM        399 

where  they  will.  They  are,  it  seems,  of  senatorial  rank  and 
are  not  in  the  worst  sort  of  prison  and  among  murderers,  but 
are  kept  apart  in  liberal  and  honorable  custody  in  the  isles  of 
the  blessed  and  the  Elysian  fields.  Do  you  lay  down  laws  for 
God?  Will  you  throw  the  Apostles  in  chains?  So  that  to  the 
day  of  judgment  they  are  to  be  kept  in  confinement  and  are 
not  with  the  Lord,  although  it  is  written  concerning  them, 
''They  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever  He  goeth."  If  the  Lamb 
is  present  everywhere,  then  they  who  are  with  the  Lamb,  it 
must  be  believed,  are  everywhere.  And  while  the  devil  and 
the  demons  wander  through  the  whole  world,  and  with  only 
too  great  speed  are  present  everywhere,  the  martyrs  after  shed- 
ding their  blood  are  to  be  kept  out  of  sight  shut  up  in  a  cof- 
fin^ from  whence  they  cannot  go  forth?  You  say  in  your 
pamphlet  that  so  long  as  we  are  alive  we  can  pray  for  one 
another;  but  after  we  are  dead  the  prayer  of  no  person  for 
another  can  be  heard,  and  especially  because  the  martyrs, 
though  they  cry  for  the  avenging  of  their  blood,  have  never 
been  able  to  obtain  their  request.  If  Apostles  and  martyrs, 
while  still  in  the  body,  can  pray  for  others,  when  they  ought 
still  to  be  anxious  for  themselves,  how  much  more  must  they 
do  so  after  they  have  their  crowns  and  victories  and  triumphs? 
A  single  man,  Moses,  won  pardon  from  God  for  six  hundred 
thousand  armed  men;  and  Stephen,  the  follower  of  his  Lord 
and  the  first  martyr  for  Christ,  entreats  pardon  for  his  perse- 
cutors; and  after  they  have  entered  on  their  life  with  Christ, 
shall  they  have  less  power?  The  Apostle  Paul  says  that 
two  hundred  and  seventy-six  souls  were  given  him  in  the  ship; 
and  after  his  dissolution,  when  he  began  to  be  with  Christ, 
must  he  then  shut  up  his  mouth  and  be  unable  to  say  a  word 
for  those  who  throughout  the  whole  world  have  believed  in 
his  Gospel?  Shall  Vigilantius  the  live  dog  be  better  than  Paul 
the  dead  Hon? 

(c)  Council  of  Laodicasa,  A.  D.   343-381,  Canons  35  /., 
Bruns,  I,  77. 

*  "Shut  up  in  the  altar"  is  another  reading. 


400  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

The  Council  of  Laodicaea  is  of  uncertain  date,  but  its  earliest  possible 
date  is  343  and  the  latest  381,  i.  e.,  between  the  Councils  of  Sardica  and 
Constantinople.  See  Hefele,  §  93.  It  owes  its  importance  not  to  any 
immediate  effect  it  had  upon  the  course  of  the  Church's  development, 
but  to  the  fact  that  its  canons  were  incorporated  in  collections  and 
received  approval,  possibly  at  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  though  not  men- 
tioned by  name  in  Canon  i,  and  certainly  at  the  Quinisext,  A.  D.  692, 
Canon  2,  In  the  West  the  canons  were  of  importance  as  having  been 
used  by  Dionysius  Exiguus  in  his  collection.  That  the  Canon  of  Holy 
Scripture  was  settled  at  this  council  is  a  traditional  commonplace  in 
theology,  but  hardly  borne  out  by  the  facts.  The  council  only  drew  up 
one  of  the  several  imperfect  lists  of  sacred  books  which  appeared  in 
antiquity.  The  following  canons  show  the  influx  of  heathenism  into 
the  Church,  resulting  from  the  changed  status  of  the  Church. 

Canon  35.  Christians  must  not  forsake  the  Church  of 
God  and  go  away  and  invoke  angels  and  gather  assemblies, 
which  things  are  forbidden.  If,  therefore,  any  one  shall  be 
found  engaged  in  secret  idolatry,  let  him  be  anathema;  for  he 
has  forsaken  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  gone  over  to  idolatry. 

Canon  36.  They  who  are  of  the  priesthood  and  of  the 
lower  clergy  shall  not  be  magicians,  enchanters,  mathemati- 
cians^ nor  astrologers;  nor  shall  they  make  amulets,  which 
are  chains  for  theii*  own  souls.  And  those  who  wear  such 
we  command  to  be  cast  out  of  the  Church. 

(d)  Augustine,  Epistula  29.     (MSL,  33  :  117.) 

Heathenism  in  the  Church. 

An  Epistle  of  Augustine,  written  when  Augustine  was  still  a  presbyter 
of  Hippo,  concerning  the  birthday  of  Leontius,  formerly  bishop  of 
Hippo.  In  it  he  tells  Alypius  that  he  had  at  length  put  an  end  to  the 
custom  among  the  Catholics  of  Hippo  of  taking  part  in  splendid  ban- 
quets on  the  birthday  of  saints,  as  was  then  the  custom  in  the  African 
churches. 

Ch.  8.  When  the  day  dawned  on  which  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  prepare  themselves  for  excess  in  eating  and  drink- 
ing, I  received  notice  that  some,  even  of  those  who  were  pres- 
ent at  my  sermon,  had  not  yet  ceased  complaining,  and  that 
so  great  was  the  power  of  detestable  custom  among  them  that, 

^  Cf.  Suetonius,  Vita  Tibcrii,  c.  36,  expiilsit  et  mathematicos .  Probably  they 
were  a  sort  of  fortune-tellers,  computers  of  nativities,  etc.     Cj.  Hefele,  loc.  cit. 


THE   EXTENSION  OF  MONASTICISM         401 

using  no  other  argument,  they  asked:  "Wherefore  is  this  now 
prohibited?  Were  they  not  Christians  who  in  former  times 
did  not  interfere  with  this  practice?"  .  .  . 

Ch.  9.  Lest,  however,  any  sHght  should  seem  to  be  put 
by  us  upon  those  who  before  our  time  either  tolerated  or  dared 
not  put  down  such  manifest  wrong-doings  of  an  undisciplined 
multitude,  I  explained  to  them  the  necessity  by  which  this 
custom  seems  to  have  arisen  in  the  Church;  namely,  that 
when,  in  the  peace  which  came  after  such  numerous  and  vio- 
lent persecutions,  crowds  of  heathen  who  wished  to  assume 
the  Christian  religion  were  kept  back  because,  having  been 
accustomed  to  celebrate  the  feasts  connected  with  idols  in 
reveUing  and  drunkenness,  they  could  not  easily  refrain  from 
these  pleasures  so  hurtful  and  so  habitual;  and  it  seemed  good 
to  our  ancestors  that  for  a  time  a  concession  should  be  made 
to  this  infirmity,  that  after  they  had  renounced  the  former 
festivals  they  might  celebrate  other  feasts,  in  honor  of  the 
holy  martyrs,  which  were  observed,  not  with  the  same  pro- 
fane design,  although  with  similar  indulgence.  Now  upon 
them  as  persons  bound  together  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and 
submissive  to  the  yoke  of  His  august  authority,  the  whole- 
some restraints  of  sobriety  were  laid;  and  these  restraints,  on 
account  of  the  honor  and  fear  of  Him  who  appointed  them 
they  might  not  resist;  and  that  therefore  it  was  now  time 
that  those  who  did  not  dare  to  deny  that  they  were  Chris- 
tians should  begin  to  live  according  to  Christ's  will;  being  now 
Christians  they  should  reject  those  things  conceded  that  they 
might  become  Christians. 

§  77.    The  Extension  of  Monasticism  Throughout 
THE  Empire 

Asceticism  arose  within  the  Christian  Church  partly  as  the 
practical  expression  of  the  conviction  of  the  worthlessness  of 
things  transitory  and  partly  as  a  reaction  against  the  moral 
laxity  of  the  times.     As  this  laxity  could  not  be  kept  entirely 


402  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

out  of  the  Church,  and  Christians  everywhere  were  exposed 
to  it,  those  who  sought  the  higher  life  felt  the  necessity  of 
retirement.  From  the  life  of  the  isolated  hermit,  asceticism 
advanced  naturally  to  the  community  type  of  the  ascetic 
life.  There  were  forerunners  in  non-Christian  religions  of 
the  solitary  ascetic  and  the  cenobite  in  Egypt,  Palestine, 
India,  and  elsewhere,  but  all  the  essentials  of  Christian  mo- 
nasticism  can  be  adequately  explained  without  employing  the 
theory  of  borrowing  or  imitation.  For  the  principal  points 
of  development,  v.  §§  53,  78,  104.  When  monasticism  had 
once  made  itself  a  strong  factor  in  the  Christian  religious 
life  of  Egypt,  it  was  quickly  taken  up  by  other  parts  of 
the  Church  as  it  satisfied  a  widely  felt  want.  In  Asia  Minor 
Basil  of  Caesarea  was  the  great  promoter  and  organizer  of  the 
ascetic  life;  and  his  rule  still  obtains  throughout  the  East. 
In  the  West  Athanasius  appears  to  have  introduced  monas- 
tic ideas  during  his  early  exiles.  Ambrose  was  a  patron  of 
the  movement.  Martin  of  Tours,  Severinus,  and  John  Cas- 
sian  did  much  to  extend  it  in  Gaul.  Augustine  organized 
his  clergy  according  to  a  monastic  rule  which  ultimately 
played  a  large  part  in  later  monasticism. 

(a)  Palladius,  Historia  Lausiaca,  ch.  38.    (MSG,  34  :  1099.) 

The  Rule  of  Pachomius. 

Palladius,  the  author  of  the  history  of  monasticism,  known  as  the 
Historia  Lausiaca,  was  an  Origenist,  pupil  of  Evagrius  Ponticus,  and 
later  bishop  in  Asia  Minor.  He  is  not  to  be  confused  with  Palladius 
of  Helenopolis,  who  lived  about  the  same  time,  in  the  first  part  of  the 
fifth  century.  The  work  of  Palladius  receives  its  name  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  dedicated  to  a  high  official,  Lausus  by  name.  Palladius  made 
a  careful  study  of  monasticism,  travelling  extensively  in  making  re- 
searches for  his  work.  He  also  used  what  written  material  was  avail- 
able. It  is  probable  that  the  text  is  largely  interpolated,  but  on  the 
whole  it  is  a  trustworthy  account  of  the  early  monasticism.  It  was 
written  about  A.  D.  420,  and  the  following  account  of  Pachomius 
should  be  compared  with  that  of  Sozomenus,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  14,  written 
some  years  later.     Text  in  Kirch,  nn.  712^. 

There  is  a  place  in  the  Thebaid  called  Tabenna,  in  which 
lived  a  certain  monk  Pachomius,  one  of  those  men  who  have 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  MONASTICISM        403 

attained  the  highest  form  of  life,  so  that  he  was  granted  pre- 
dictions of  the  future  and  angeHc  visions.  He  was  a  great 
lover  of  the  poor,  and  had  great  love  to  men.  When,  there- 
fore, he  was  sitting  in  a  cave  an  angel  of  the  Lord  came  in  and 
appeared  to  him  and  said:  Pachomius  you  have  done  well 
those  things  which  pertain  to  your  own  affairs;  therefore  sit 
no  longer  idle  in  this  cave.  Up,  therefore,  go  forth  and  gather 
all  the  younger  monks  and  dwell  with  them  and  give  them 
laws  according  to  the  form  which  I  give  thee.  And  he  gave 
him  a  brass  tablet  on  which  the  following  things  were  written : 

1.  Give  to  each  to  eat  and  drink  according  to  his  strength; 
and  give  labors  according  to  the  powers  of  those  eating,  and 
forbid  neither  fasting  nor  eating.  Thus  appoint  difficult 
labors  to  the  stronger  and  those  who  eat,  but  the  lighter  and 
easy  tasks  to  those  who  discipline  themselves  more  and  are 
weaker. 

2.  Make  separate  cells  in  the  same  place;  and  let  three 
remain  in  a  cell.  But  let  the  food  of  all  be  prepared  in  one 
house. 

3.  They  may  not  sleep  lying  down,  but  having  made  seats 
built  incHning  backward  let  them  place  their  bedding  on 
them  and  sleep  seated. 

4.  But  by  night  let  them  wear  linen  tunics,  being  girded 
about.  Let  each  of  them  have  a  shaggy  goatskin,  made 
white.  Without  this  let  them  neither  eat  nor  sleep.  When 
they  go  in  unto  the  communion  of  the  mysteries  of  Christ 
every  Sabbath  and  Lord's  Day,  let  them  loose  their  girdles 
and  put  off  the  goatskin,  and  enter  with  only  their  cuculla 
[cf.  DCA].  But  he  made  the  cuculla  for  them  without  any 
fleece,  as  for  boys;  and  he  commanded  to  place  upon  them 
certain  branding  marks  of  a  purple  cross. 

5.  He  commanded  that  there  be  twenty-four  groups  of  the 
brethren,  according  to  the  number  of  the  twenty-four  letters. 
And  he  prescribed  that  to  each  group  should  be  given  as  a 
name  a  letter  of  the  Greek  alphabet,  from  Alpha  and  Beta, 
one  after  another,  to  Omega,  in  order  that  when  the  archi- 


404  THE   IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

mandrite  asked  for  any  one  in  so  great  a  company,  that  one 
may  be  asked  who  is  the  second  in  each,  how  group  Alpha  is, 
or  how  the  group  Beta;  again  let  him  salute  the  group  Rho; 
the  name  of  the  letters  following  its  own  proper  sign.  And 
upon  the  simpler  and  more  guileless  place  the  name  Iota; 
and  upon  those  who  are  more  ill-tempered  and  less  righteous 
the  letter  Xi.  And  thus  in  harmony  with  the  principles  and 
the  life  and  manners  of  them  arrange  the  names  of  the  let- 
ters, only  the  spiritual  understanding  the  meaning. 

6.  There  was  written  on  the  tablet  that  if  there  come  a 
stranger  of  another  monastery,  having  a  different  form  of 
life,  he  shall  not  eat  nor  drink  with  them,  nor  go  in  with  them 
into  the  monastery,  unless  he  shall  be  found  in  the  way  out- 
side of  the  monastery. 

7.  But  do  not  receive  for  three  years  into  the  contest  of 
proficients  him  who  has  entered  once  for  all  to  remain  with 
them;  but  when  he  has  performed  the  more  difficult  tasks, 
then  let  him  after  a  period  of  three  years  enter  the  stadium. 

8.  When  they  eat  let  them  veil  their  faces,  that  one  brother 
may  not  see  another  brother  eating.  They  are  not  to  speak 
while  they  eat;  nor  outside  of  their  dish  or  off  the  table  shall 
they  turn  their  eyes  toward  anything  else. 

9.  And  he  made  it  a  rule  that  during  the  whole  day  they 
should  offer  twelve  prayers;  and  at  the  time  of  lighting  the 
lamps,  twelve;  and  in  the  course  of  the  night,  twelve;  and 
at  the  ninth  hour,  three;  but  when  it  seemed  good  for  the  whole 
company  to  eat,  he  directed  that  each  group  should  first  sing 
a  psalm  at  each  prayer. 

But  when  the  great  Pachomius  replied  to  the  angel  that  the 
prayers  were  few,  the  angel  said  to  him:  I  have  appointed 
these  that  the  little  ones  may  advance  and  fulfil  the  law  and 
not  be  distressed;  but  the  perfect  do  not  need  to  have  laws 
given  to  them.  For  being  by  themselves  in  their  cells,  they 
have  dedicated  their  entire  Hfe  to  contemplation  on  God. 
But  to  these,  as  many  as  do  not  have  an  intelligent  mind,  I 
will  give  a  law  that  as  saucy  servants  out  of  fear  for  the 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  MONASTICISM         405 

Master  they  may  fulfil  the  whole  order  of  life  and  direct  it 
properly.  When  the  angel  had  given  these  directions  and 
fulfilled  his  ministry  he  departed  from  the  great  Pachomius. 
There  are  monasteries  observing  this  rule,  composed  of  seven 
thousand  men,  but  the  first  and  great  monastery,  wherein  the 
blessed  Pachomius  dwelt,  and  which  gave  birth  to  the  other 
places  of  asceticism,  has  one  thousand  three  hundred  men. 

(b)  Basil    the    Great,    Regula  fusius   tradata,    Questio    7. 

(MSG,  31  :  927.) 

The  Rule  of  St.  Basil  is  composed  in  the  form  of  question  and  answer, 
and  in  place  of  setting  down  a  simple,  cleady  stated  law,  with  perhaps 
some  little  exhortation,  goes  into  much  detailed  argument,  even  in 
the  briefer  Rule.  In  the  following  passage  Basil  points  out  the  ad- 
vantages of  the  cenobitic  life  over  the  solitary  or  hermit  life.  It  is 
condensed  as  indicated. 

Questio  VII.  Since  your  words  have  given  us  full  assur- 
ance that  the  hfe  [i.  e.,  the  cenobitic  life]  is  dangerous  with 
those  who  despise  the  commandments  of  the  Lord,  we  wish 
accordingly  to  learn  whether  it  is  necessary  that  he  who  with- 
draws should  remain  alone  or  live  with  brothers  of  like  mind 
who  have  placed  before  themselves  the  same  goal  of  piety. 

Responsio  i.  I  think  that  the  Hfe  of  several  in  the  same 
place  is  much  more  profitable.  First,  because  for  bodily 
wants  no  one  of  us  is  sufficient  for  himself,  but  we  need  each 
other  in  providing  what  is  necessary.  For  just  as  the  foot 
has  one  ability,  but  is  wanting  another,  and  without  the  help 
of  the  other  members  it  would  find  neither  its  own  power 
strong  nor  sufficient  of  itself  to  continue,  nor  any  supply  for 
what  it  lacks,  so  it  is  in  the  case  of  the  solitary  life:  what  is 
of  use  to  us  and  what  is  wanting  we  cannot  provide  for  our- 
selves, for  God  who  created  the  world  has  so  ordered  all  things 
that  we  are  dependent  upon  each  other,  as  it  is  written  that 
we  may  join  ourselves  to  one  another  [cf.  Wis.  13:  20].  But 
in  addition  to  this,  reverence  to  the  love  of  Christ  does  not 
permit  each  one  to  have  regard  only  to  his  own  affairs,  for 
love,  he  says,  seeks  not  her  own  [I  Cor.  13:  5].     The  solitary 


4o6  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

life  has  only  one  goal,  the  service  of  its  own  interests.  That 
clearly  is  opposed  to  the  law  of  love,  which  the  Apostle  ful- 
filled, when  he  did  not  in  his  eyes  seek  his  own  advantage 
but  the  advantage  of  many,  that  they  might  be  saved  [cj.  I 
Cor.  lo  :  33].  Further,  no  one  in  solitude  recognizes  his  own 
defects,  since  he  has  no  one  to  correct  him  and  in  gentleness 
and  mercy  direct  him  on  his  way.  For  even  if  correction 
is  from  an  enemy,  it  may  often  in  the  case  of  those  who  are 
well  disposed  rouse  the  desire  for  healing;  but  the  healing  of 
sin  by  him  who  sincerely  loves  is  wisely  accomplished.  .  .  . 
Also  the  commands  may  be  better  fulfilled  by  a  larger  com- 
munity, but  not  by  one  alone;  for  while  this  thing  is  being 
done  another  will  be  neglected;  for  example,  by  attendance 
upon  the  sick  the  reception  of  strangers  is  neglected;  and 
in  the  bestowal  and  distribution  of  the  necessities  of  life 
(especially  when  in  these  services  much  time  is  consumed) 
the  care  of  the  work  is  neglected,  so  that  by  this  the  greatest 
commandment  and  the  one  most  helpful  to  salvation  is  neg- 
lected; neither  the  hungry  are  fed  nor  the  naked  clothed. 
Who  would  therefore  value  higher  the  idle,  useless  life  than  the 
fruitful  which  fulfils  the  commandments  of  God? 

3.  .  .  .  Also  in  the  preservation  of  the  gifts  bestowed  by 
God  the  cenobitic  life  is  preferable.  .  .  .  For  him  who  falls 
into  sin,  the  recovery  of  the  right  path  is  so  much  easier,  for 
he  is  ashamed  at  the  blame  expressed  by  so  many  in  common, 
so  that  it  happens  to  him  as  it  is  written:  It  is  enough  that 
the  same  therefore  be  punished  by  many  [II  Cor.  2:6].  .  .  . 
There  are  still  other  dangers  which  we  say  accompany  the 
solitary  life,  the  first  and  greatest  is  that  of  self-satisfaction. 
For  he  who  has  no  one  to  test  his  work  easily  believes  that  he 
has  completely  fulfilled  the  commandments.  .  .  . 

4.  For  how  shall  he  manifest  his  humiHty,  when  he  has  no 
one  to  whom  he  can  show  himself  the  inferior?  How  shall  he 
manifest  compassion,  cut  off  from  the  society  of  many?  How 
will  he  exercise  himself  in  patience,  if  no  one  opposes  his 
wishes? 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  MONASTICISM        407 

(c)  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  Canon  4.    Bruns,  I,  26. 

The  subjection  of  the  monastery  and  the  monks  to  the  bishop. 

Asceticism  of  the  solitary  life  was  apart  from  the  organization  of 
the  Church;  when  this  form  of  life  had  developed  in  cenobitism  it 
still  remained  for  a  time,  at  least,  outside  the  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion. Athanasius,  who  was  a  patron  of  the  monastic  Hfe  and  often 
found  support  and  refuge  among  the  monks,  did  much  to  bring  Egyp- 
tian monasticism  back  to  the  Church,  and  in  the  fifth  century  monks 
became  a  great  power  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  cf.  the  Origenistic  contro- 
versy, V.  infra,  §  88.  Basil,  at  once  archbishop  of  Caesarea  and  lead- 
ing exponent  of  monastic  ideas,  brought  the  two  to  some  extent  to- 
gether. But  always  the  episcopal  control  was  only  with  difficulty 
brought  to  bear  on  the  monastic  hfe,  and  in  the  West  this  opposition 
of  the  two  religious  forces  ultimately  became  embodied  in  the  principle 
of  monastic  exemption.  The  Council  of  Chalcedon,  in  451,  aimed  to 
correct  the  early  abuse  by  placing  the  monasteries  under  the  control 
of  the  bishop. 

They  who  lead  a  true  and  worthy  monastic  life  shall  enjoy 
the  honor  that  belongs  to  them.  But  since  there  are  some  who 
assume  the  monastic  condition  only  as  a  pretence,  and  will 
upset  the  ecclesiastical  and  civil  regulations  and  affairs,  and 
run  about  without  distinction  in  the  cities  and  want  to  found 
cloisters  for  themselves,  the  synod  therefore  has  decreed  that 
no  one  shall  build  a  cloister  or  house  of  prayer  or  erect  any- 
where without  the  consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  city;  and  fur- 
ther, that  also  the  monks  of  every  district  and  city  shall  be 
subject  to  the  bishop,  that  they  shall  love  peace  and  quiet 
and  observe  the  fasts  and  prayers  in  the  places  where  they 
are  assigned  continually;  that  they  shall  not  cumber  them- 
selves with  ecclesiastical  and  secular  business  and  shall  not  take 
part  in  such ;  they  shall  not  leave  their  cloisters  except  when 
in  cases  of  necessity  they  may  be  commissioned  by  the  bishop 
of  the  city  with  such ;  that  no  slave  shall  be  admitted  into  the 
cloister  in  order  to  become  a  monk  without  the  permission  of 
his  master.  Whoever  violates  this  our  order  shall  be  excom- 
municated, that  the  name  of  God  be  not  blasphemed.  The 
bishop  of  the  city  must  keep  a  careful  oversight  of  the  cloisters. 

{d)  Jerome,  Epistula  127,  ad  Principiam.   (MSL,  22  :  1087.) 


4o8  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

The  introduction  of  monasticism  into  the  West  during  the  Arian 
controversy. 

5.  At  that  time  no  high-born  lady  at  Rome  knew  of  the 
profession  of  the  monastic  life,  neither  would  she  have  dared, 
on  account  of  the  novelty,  publicly  to  assume  a  name  that  was 
regarded  as  ignominious  and  vile.  It  was  from  some  priests 
of  Alexandria  and  from  Pope  Athanasius^  and  subsequently 
from  Peter,^  who,  to  escape  the  persecution  of  the  Arian 
heretics,  had  fled  for  refuge  to  Rome  as  the  safest  haven  of 
their  communion — it  was  from  these  that  she  [Marcella] 
learned  of  the  Hfe  of  the  blessed  Anthony,  then  still  living,  and 
of  the  monasteries  in  the  Thebaid,  founded  by  Pachomius, 
and  of  the  discipline  of  virgins  and  widows.  Nor  was  she 
ashamed  to  profess  what  she  knew  was  pleasing  to  Christ. 
Many  years  after  her  example  was  followed  first  by  Sophro- 
nia  and  then  by  others.  .  .  .  The  revered  Paula  enjoyed 
Marcella's  friendship,  and  it  was  in  her  cell  that  Eustochium, 
that  ornament  of  virginity,  was  trained. 

(e)  Augustine,  Confessiones,  VIII,  ch.  6.     (MSL,  32  :  755.) 
The  extension  of  monasticism  in  the  West. 

Upon  a  certain  day  .  .  .  there  came  to  the  house  to  see 
Alypius  and  me,  Pontitianus,  a  countryman  of  ours,  in  so 
far  as  he  was  an  African,  who  held  high  office  in  the  Emperor's 
court.  What  he  wanted  with  us  I  know  not.  We  sat  down 
to  talk  together,  and  upon  the  table  before  us,  used  for  games, 
he  noticed  by  chance  a  book;  he  took  it  up,  opened  it,  and, 
contrary  to  his  expectations,  found  it  to  be  the  Apostle  Paul, 
for  he  imagined  it  to  be  one  of  those  books  the  teaching  of 
which  was  wearing  me  out.  At  this  he  looked  up  at  me 
smilingly,  and  expressed  his  delight  and  wonder  that  he  so 
unexpectedly  found  this  book,  and  this  only,  before  my  eyes. 
For  he  was  both  a  Christian  and  baptized,  and  in  constant  and 

^  The  title  of  pope  which  was  not  yet  restricted  even  by  Latins  to  the 
bishop  of  Rome  was  in  general  use  as  the  title  of  the  bishop  of  Alexandria. 
2  Successor  of  Athanasius  in  the  see  of  Alexandria. 


THE  EXTENSION   OF   MONASTICISM         409 

daily  prayers  he  often  prostrated  himself  before  Thee  our 
God  in  the  Church.  When,  then,  I  had  told  him  that  I  be- 
stowed much  pains  upon  these  writings,  a  conversation  en- 
sued on  his  speaking  of  Anthony,  the  Egyptian  monk,  whose 
name  was  in  high  repute  among  Thy  servants,  though  up  to 
that  time  unfamiliar  to  us.  When  he  came  to  know  this  he 
lingered  on  that  topic,  imparting  to  us  who  were  ignorant  a 
knowledge  of  this  man  so  eminent,  and  marvelling  at  our  ig- 
norance. But  we  were  amazed,  hearing  Thy  wonderful  works 
most  fully  manifested  in  times  so  recent,  and  almost  in  our 
own,  wrought  in  the  true  faith  and  the  Catholic  Church.  We 
all  wondered — we  that  they  were  so  great,  and  he  that  we 
had  never  heard  of  them. 

From  this  his  conversation  turned  to  the  companies  in  the 
monasteries,  and  their  manners  so  fragrant  unto  Thee,  and 
of  the  fruitful  deserts  of  the  wilderness,  of  which  we  knew 
nothing.  And  there  was  a  monastery  at  Milan  full  of  good 
brethren,  without  the  walls  of  the  city,  under  the  care  of 
Ambrose,  and  we  were  ignorant  of  it.  He  went  on  with  his 
relation,  and  we  listened  intently  and  in  silence.  He  then 
related  to  us  how  on  a  certain  afternoon,  at  Treves,  when  the 
Emperor  was  taken  up  with  seeing  the  Circensian  games,  he 
and  three  others,  his  comrades,  went  out  for  a  walk  in  the 
gardens  close  to  the  city  walls,  and  there,  as  they  chanced  to 
walk  two  and  two,  one  strolled  away  with  him,  while  the  other 
two  went  by  themselves;  and  these  in  their  rambhngs  came 
upon  a  certain  cottage  where  dwelt  some  of  Thy  servants, 
^^poor  in  spirit,"  of  whom  ''is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  and 
they  found  there  a  book  in  which  was  written  the  life  of 
Anthony.  This  one  of  them  began  to  read,  marvel  at,  and  be 
inflamed  by  it;  and  in  the  reading  to  meditate  on  embracing 
such  a  Hfe,  and  giving  up  his  worldly  employments  to  serve 
Thee.  .  .  .  Then  Pontitianus,  and  he  that  had  walked  with 
him  through  other  parts  of  the  garden,  came  in  search  of  them 
to  the  same  place,  and,  having  found  them,  advised  them  to 
return  as   the  day  had  decHned.  ...  But  the  other  two, 


4IO  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE   CHURCH 

setting  their  affections  upon  heavenly  things,  remained  in  the 
cottage.  And  both  of  them  had  affianced  brides  who  also, 
when  they  heard  of  this,  dedicated  their  virginity  to  God. 

(/)  Sulpicius  Severus,  Life  of  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  ch.  lo. 
(MSL,  20  :  166.) 

Monasticism  in  Gaul. 

St.  Martin,  bishop  of  Tours,  was  born  316,  became  bishop  of  Tours 
in  371,  and  died  396.  He  was  the  most  considerable  figure  in  the 
Church  life  of  Gaul  at  that  time.  Sulpicius  Severus  was  his  disciple 
and  enthusiastic  biographer.  For  John  Cassian  and  his  works  on 
monasticism,  see  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XI. 

And  now  having  entered  upon  the  episcopal  office,  it  is 
beyond  my  power  to  set  forth  how  well  and  how  much  he 
[Martin]  performed.  For  he  remained  with  the  utmost  con- 
stancy the  same  as  he  had  been  before.  In  his  heart  there 
was  the  same  humility  and  in  his  garments  the  same  simplic- 
ity; and  so  full  of  dignity  and  courtesy,  he  maintained  the 
dignity  of  a  bishop,  yet  so  as  not  to  lay  aside  the  objects  and 
virtues  of  a  monk.  Accordingly  he  made  use  for  some  time  of 
the  cell  connected  with  the  church;  but  afterward,  when  he 
felt  it  impossible  to  tolerate  the  disturbance  of  the  numbers 
of  those  visiting  it,  he  established  a  monastery  for  himself 
about  two  miles  outside  the  city.  This  spot  was  so  secret 
and  retired  that  he  did  not  desire  the  solitude  of  a  hermit. 
For,  on  one  side,  it  was  surrounded  by  a  precipitous  rock  of 
a  lofty  mountain;  while  the  river  Loire  has  shut  in  the  rest 
of  the  plain  by  a  bend  extending  back  for  a  distance.  The 
place  could  be  approached  by  only  one  passage,  and  that 
very  narrow.  Here,  then,  he  possessed  a  cell  constructed  of 
wood;  many  also  of  the  brethren  had,  in  the  same  manner, 
fashioned  retreats  for  themselves,  but  most  of  them  had 
formed  these  out  of  the  rock  of  the  overhanging  mountain, 
hollowed  out  into  caves.  There  were  altogether  eighty  dis- 
ciples, who  were  being  disciplined  after  the  example  of  the 
saintly  master.  No  one  there  had  anything  which  was  called 
his  own;   all  things  were  possessed  in  common.     It  was  not 


CELIBACY  OF  THE   CLERGY  411 

allowed  either  to  buy  or  sell  anything,  as  is  the  custom 
amongst  most  monks.  No  art  was  practised  there  except 
that  of  transcribers,  and  even  to  this  the  more  youthful 
were  assigned,  while  the  elders  spent  their  time  in  prayer. 
Rarely  did  any  of  them  go  beyond  the  cell  unless  when 
they  assembled  at  the  place  of  prayer.  They  all  took  their 
food  together  after  the  hour  of  fasting  was  past.  No  one 
used  wine  except  when  illness  compelled  him.  Most  of  them 
were  dressed  in  garments  of  camel's  hair.  Any  dress  ap- 
proaching softness  was  there  deemed  criminal,  and  this  must 
be  thought  the  more  remarkable  because  many  among  them 
were  such  as  are  deemed  of  noble  rank,  who  though  very  dif- 
ferently brought  up  had  forced  themselves  down  to  this  degree 
of  humility  and  patience,  and  we  have  seen  many  of  these 
afterward  as  bishops.  For  what  city  or  church  could  there 
be  that  would  not  desire  to  have  its  priest  from  the  monas- 
tery of  Martin? 

§  78.    Celibacy  of  the  Clergy  and  the  Regulation  of 
Clerical  Marriage 

The  insistence  upon  clerical  celibacy  and  even  the  mere 
regulation  of  the  marriage  of  the  clergy  contributed  not  a 
little  to  making  a  clear  distinction  between  the  clergy  and 
the  laity  which  became  a  marked  feature  in  the  constitution 
of  the  Church.  The  East  and  the  West  have  always  differed 
as  to  clerical  marriage.  In  the  East  the  parish  clergy  have 
always  been  married ;  the  bishops  formerly  married  have  long 
since  been  exclusively  of  the  unmarried  clergy.  The  clergy 
who  do  not  marry  become  monks.  This  seems  to  have  been 
the  solution  of  practical  difficulties  which  were  found  to  arise 
in  that  part  of  the  Church  in  connection  with  general  cler- 
ical celibacy.  In  the  West  the  cehbacy  of  the  clergy  as  a 
body  was  an  ideal  from  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century, 
and  became  an  established  principle  by  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century  under  Leo  the  Great,  though  as  a  matter  of  fact 


412  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

it  was  not  enforced  as  a  universal  obligation  of  the  clerical 
order  until  the  reforms  of  Gregory  VII.  In  the  following 
canons  and  documents  the  division  is  made  between  the 
East  and  the  West,  and  the  selected  documents  are  arranged 
chronologically  so  as  to  show  the  progress  in  legislation  toward 
the  condition  that  afterward  became  dominant  in  the  respec- 
tive divisions  of  the  Empire  and  the  Church. 

(A)     Clerical  Marriage  in  the  East 

(a)  Council  of  Ancyra,  A.   D.  314,  Canon  10.    Bruns,  I, 

68.     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  90. 

The  following  canon  is  important  as  being  the  first  Eastern  regulation 
of  a  council  bearing  on  the  subject  and  having  been  generally  followed 
long  before  the  canons  of  this  council  were  adopted  as  binding  by  the 
Council  of  Constantinople  known  as  the  Quinisext  in  692,  Canon  2;  cf. 
Hefele,  §  327.     For  the  Council  of  Ancyra,  see  Hefele,  §  16. 

Canon  10.  Those  who  have  been  made  deacons,  declaring 
when  they  were  ordained  that  they  must  marry,  because  they 
were  not  able  to  abide  as  they  were,  and  who  afterward  mar- 
ried, shall  continue  in  the  ministry  because  it  was  conceded 
to  them  by  the  bishop.  But  if  they  were  silent  on  the  mat- 
ter, undertaking  at  their  ordination  to  abide  as  they  were, 
and  afterward  proceeded  to  marry,  they  shall  cease  from  the 
diaconate. 

(b)  Council  of  Nicasa,  A.  D.  325,  Canon  3.    Bruns,  I,  15. 

Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  loi,  Kirch,  n.  363. 

The  meaning  of  the  following  canon  is  open  to  question  because  of 
the  term  suhintroduda  and  the  concluding  clause.  Hefele  contends 
that  every  woman  is  excluded  except  certain  specified  persons.  But 
the  custom  of  the  East  was  not  to  treat  the  rule  as  meaning  such.  See 
E.  Venables,  art.  "Subintroductae,"  in  DCB;  and  Achelis,  art.  "Sub- 
introductse,"  in  PRE.  Hefele's  discussion  may  be  found  in  his  History 
of  the  Councils,  §§  42  and  43;  in  the  latter  he  discusses  the  question  as 
to  the  position  of  the  council  as  to  the  matter  of  clerical  cehbacy. 

Canon  3.  The  great  synod  has  stringently  forbidden  any 
bishop,  presbyter,  deacon,  or  any  one  of  the  clergy  whatever, 
to  have  a  suhintroduda  (o-vveLaafcro^)  dwelling  with  him,  ex- 


CELIBACY  OF   THE   CLERGY  413 

cept  only  a  mother,  sister,  or  aunt,  or  such  persons  only  as 
are  beyond  all  suspicion. 

(c)  Council  of  Gangra,  A.  D.  355-381,  Canon  4.    Bruns, 

I,  107. 

The  canons  of  this  council  were  approved  at  the  Quinisext  together 
with  those  of  Ancyra  and  Laodicaea  and  others.  This  canon  is  directed 
against  the  fanaticism  of  the  Eustathians. 

Canon  4.  If  any  one  shall  maintain,  concerning  a  married 
presbyter,  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  partake  of  the  oblation  that 
he  offers,  let  him  be  anathema. 

(d)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  22.     (MSG,  67  :  640.) 

That  the  custom  of  clerical  celibacy  grew  up  without  much  regard  to 
conciliar  action,  and  that  canons  only  later  regulated  what  had  been 
established  and  modified  by  custom,  is  illustrated  by  the  variation  in 
the  matter  of  clerical  marriage  noted  by  Socrates. 

I  myself  learned  of  another  custom  in  Thessaly.  If  a 
clergyman  in  that  country  should,  after  taking  orders,  cohabit 
with  his  wife,  whom  he  had  legally  married  before  ordination, 
he  would  be  degraded.^  In  the  East,  indeed,  all  clergymen 
and  even  bishops  abstain  from  their  wives;  but  this  they  do 
of  their  own  accord  and  not  by  the  necessity  of  law;  for 
many  of  them  have  had  children  by  their  lawful  wives  during 
their  episcopate.  The  author  of  the  usage  which  obtains 
in  Thessaly  was  Hehodorus,  bishop  of  Tricca  in  that  country, 
under  whose  name  it  is  said  that  erotic  books  are  extant,  en- 
titled Ethiopica,  which  he  composed  in  his  youth.  The  same 
custom  prevails  in  Thessalonica  and  in  Macedonia  and  Achaia. 

(e)  Quinisext  Council,  A.  D.  692,  Canons  6,  12,  13,  48. 
Bruns,  1,39/. 

Canons  on  celibacy. 

The  Trullan  Council  fixed  the  practice  of  the  Eastern  churches  re- 
garding the  ceHbacy  of  the  clergy.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  the 
clergyman  w^as  not  allowed  to  marry  after  ordination.  But  if  he  mar- 
ried before  ordination  he  did  not,  except  in  the  case  of  the  bishops, 
separate  from  his  wife,  but  lived  with  her  in  lawful  marital  relations. 

^  Cf.  Apostolic  Canons,  6,  27;  also  Council  of  Neo-Caesarea,  Can.  i. 


414  THE  IMPERIAL   STATE   CHURCH 

Canon  6.  Since  it  is  declared  in  the  Apostolic  Canons  that 
of  those  who  are  advanced  to  the  clergy  unmarried,  only 
lectors  and  cantors  are  able  to  marry,  we  also,  maintaining 
this,  determine  that  henceforth  it  is  in  nowise  lawful  for  any 
subdeacon,  deacon,  or  presbyter  after  his  ordination  to  con- 
tract matrimony;  but  if  he  shall  have  dared  to  do  so,  let  him 
be  deposed.  And  if  any  of  those  who  enter  the  clergy  wishes 
to  be  joined  to  a  wife  in  lawful  marriage  before  he  is  ordained 
subdeacon,  deacon,  or  presbyter,  let  it  be  done. 

Canon  12.  Moreover,  it  has  also  come  to  our  knowledge 
that  in  Africa  and  Libya  and  in  other  places  the  most  God- 
beloved  bishops  in  those  parts  do  not  refuse  to  Kve  with  their 
wives,  even  after  consecration,  thereby  giving  scandal  and 
offence  to  the  people.  Since,  therefore,  it  is  our  particular 
care  that  all  things  tend  to  the  good  of  the  flock  placed  in  our 
hands  and  committed  to  us,  it  has  seemed  good  that  hence- 
forth nothing  of  the  kind  shall  in  any  way  occur.  ...  But 
if  any  shall  have  been  observed  to  do  such  a  thing,  let  him  be 
deposed. 

Canon  13.  [Text  in  Kirch,  nn.  985  ff.]  Since  we  know  it 
to  be  handed  down  as  a  rule  of  the  Roman  Church  that  those 
who  are  deemed  worthy  to  be  advanced  to  the  diaconate  and 
presbyterate  should  promise  no  longer  to  cohabit  with  their 
wives,  we,  preserving  the  ancient  rule  and  apostoHc  perfection 
and  order,  will  that  lawful  marriage  of  men  who  are  in  holy 
orders  be  from  this  time  forward  firm,  by  no  means  dissolving 
their  union  with  their  wives  nor  depriving  them  of  their 
mutual  intercourse  at  a  convenient  season.  .  .  .  For  it  is 
meet  that  they  who  assist  at  the  divine  altar  should  be  abso- 
lutely continent  when  they  are  handling  holy  things,  in  order 
that  they  may  be  able  to  obtain  from  God  what  they  ask  in 
sincerity. 

Canon  48.  The  wife  of  him  who  is  advanced  to  the  episco- 
pal dignity  shall  be  separated  from  her  husband  by  mutual 
consent,  and  after  his  ordination  and  consecration  to  the 
episcopate  she  shall  enter  a  monastery  situated  at  a  distance 


CELIBACY  OF  THE   CLERGY  415 

from  the  abode  of  the  bishop,  and  there  let  her  enjoy  the 
bishop's  provision.  And  if  she  is  deemed  worthy  she  may  be 
advanced  to  the  dignity  of  a  deaconess. 

(B)     Clerical  Celibacy  in  the  West 

(a)  Council  of  Elvira,  A.  D.  306,  Canon  33.  Bmns,  II, 
6.     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  90,  and  Kirch,  n.  305. 

This  is  the  earliest  canon  of  any  council  requiring  clerical  celibacy. 
For  the  Council  of  Elvira,  see  Hefele,  §  13;  A.  W.  W.  Dale,  The  Synod 
of  Elvira,  London,  1882.  For  discussion  of  reasons  for  assigning  a 
later  date,  see  E.  Hennecke,  art.  "Elvira,  Synode  um  313,"  in  PRE, 
and  the  literature  there  cited.  The  council  was  a  provincial  synod  of 
southern  Spain. 

Canon  33.  It  was  voted  that  it  be  entirely  forbidden^ 
bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons,  and  all  clergy  placed  in  the 
ministry  to  abstain  from  their  wives  and  not  to  beget  sons: 
whoever  does  this,  let  him  be  deprived  of  the  honor  of  the 
clergy. 

(b)  Siricius,  Decretal,  A.  D.  385.  (MSL,  13  :  1138.)  Mirbt, 
nn.  122/.;  cf.  Denziger,  nn.  Sj  ff. 

Clerical  celibacy:  the  force  of  decretals. 

In  the  following  passages  from  the  first  authentic  decretal,  the 
celibacy  of  the  clergy  is  laid  down  as  of  divine  authority  in  the  Church, 
and  the  rule  remains  characteristic  of  the  Western  Church.  See  Canon 
13  of  the  Quinisext  Council,  above,  §  78,  e.  The  binding  authority  of 
the  decretals  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  is  also  asserted,  and  this,  too,  be- 
comes characteristic  of  the  jurisprudence  of  the  Western  Church. 

Ch.  7  (§8).  Why  did  He  admonish  them  to  whom  the  holy 
of  holies  was  committed,  Be  ye  holy,  because  I  the  Lord 
your  God  am  holy?  [Lev.  20  :  7.]  Why  were  they  com- 
manded to  dwell  in  the  temple  in  the  year  of  their  turn  to 
officiate,  afar  from  their  own  homes?  Evidently  it  was  for 
the  reason  that  they  might  not  be  able  to  maintain  their 

1  Note  the  extraordinary  form  in  which  the  clergy  are  apparently  forbidden 
to  do  what  in  reality  the  council  commands;  namely,  that  they  should  abandon 
marital  relations  with  their  wives.  Cf.  Hefele,  loc.  cit.  Can.  80  of  Elvira  uses 
the  same  uncouth  phraseology. 


4i6  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

marital  relations  with  their  wives,  so  that,  adorned  with  a 
pure  conscience,  they  might  offer  to  God  an  acceptable  sacri- 
fice. After  the  time  of  their  service  was  accomplished  they 
were  permitted  to  resume  their  marital  relations  for  the  sake 
of  continuing  the  succession,  because  only  from  the  tribe  of 
Levi  was  it  ordained  that  any  one  should  be  admitted  to  the 
priesthood.  .  .  .  Wherefore  also  our  Lord  Jesus,  when  by 
His  coming  He  brought  us  light,  solemnly  affirmed  in  the  Gos- 
pel that  He  came  not  to  destroy  but  to  fulfil  the  law.  And 
therefore  He  who  is  the  bridegroom  of  the  Church  wished 
that  its  form  should  be  resplendent  with  chastity,  so  that  in 
the  day  of  Judgment,  when  He  should  come  again,  He  might 
find  it  without  spot  or  blemish,  as  He  taught  by  His  Apostle. 
And  by  the  rule  of  its  ordinances  which  may  not  be  gainsaid, 
we  who  are  priests  and  Levites  are  bound  from  the  day  of  our 
ordination  to  keep  our  bodies  in  soberness  and  modesty,  so 
that  in  those  sacrifices  which  we  offer  daily  to  our  God  we  may 
please  Him  in  all  things. 

Ch.  15  (§  20).  To  each  of  the  cases,  which  by  our  son 
Bassanius  you  have  referred  to  the  Roman  Church  as  the  head 
of  your  body,  we  have  returned,  as  I  think,  a  sufficient  answer. 
Now  we  exhort  your  brotherly  mind  more  and  more  to  obey 
the  canons  and  to  observe  the  decretals  that  have  been  drawn 
up,  that  those  things  which  we  have  written  to  your  inquiries 
you  may  cause  to  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  all  our  fellow- 
bishops,  and  not  only  of  those  who  are  placed  in  your  diocese, 
but  also  of  the  Carthaginians,  the  Baetici,  the  Lusitani,  and 
the  Gauls,  and  those  who  in  neighboring  provinces  border 
upon  you,  those  things  which  by  us  have  been  helpfully 
decreed  may  be  sent  accompanied  by  your  letters.  And 
although  no  priest  of  the  Lord  is  free  to  ignore  the  statutes 
of  the  ApostoHc  See  and  the  venerable  definitions  of  the 
canons,  yet  it  would  be  more  useful  and,  on  account  of  the 
long  time  you  have  been  in  holy  orders,  exceedingly  glorious 
for  you,  beloved,  if  those  things  which  have  been  written  you 
especially  by  name,  might  through  your  agreement  with  us 


CELIBACY  OF  THE   CLERGY  417 

be  brought  to  the  notice  of  all  our  brethren,  and  that,  seeing 
that  they  have  not  been  drawn  up  inconsiderately  but  pru- 
dently and  with  very  great  care,  they  should  remain  inviolate, 
and  that,  for  the  future,  opportunity  for  any  excuse  might  be 
cut  off,  which  is  now  open  to  no  one  among  us. 

(c)  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  390,  Cawow  2.    Bruns,  1, 117. 
See  also  Canon  i  of  the  same  council. 

Canon  2 .  Bishop  Aurelius  said :  "  When  in  a  previous  coun- 
cil the  matter  of  the  maintenance  of  continence  and  chastity 
was  discussed,  these  three  orders  were  joined  by  a  certain 
agreement  of  chastity  through  their  ordination,  bishops,  I 
say,  presbyters,  and  deacons;  as  it  was  agreed  that  it  was 
seemly  that  they,  as  most  holy  pontiffs  and  priests  of  God, 
and  as  Levites  who  serve  divine  things,  should  be  continent 
in  all  things  whereby  they  may  be  able  to  obtain  from  God 
what  they  ask  sincerely,  so  that  what  the  Apostles  taught 
and  antiquity  observed,  we  also  keep."  By  all  the  bishops  it 
was  said:  '^  It  is  the  pleasure  of  all  that  bishops,  presbyters, 
and  deacons,  or  those  who  handle  the  sacraments,  should  be 
guardians  of  modesty,  and  refrain  themselves  from  their  wives." 
By  all  it  was  said :  ''  It  is  our  pleasure  that  in  all  things,  and  by 
all,  modesty  should  be  preserved,  who  serve  the  altar." 

(d)  Leo  the  Great,  Ep.  14,  ad  Anastasium;  Ep.  167,  ad 
Rusticum.     (MSL,  54  :  672,  1204.) 

The  final  form  of  the  Western  rule,  that  the  clergy,  from  subdeacon 
to  bishop,  both  inclusive,  should  be  bound  to  celibacy,  was  expressed 
in  its  permanent  form  by  Leo  the  Great  in  his  letters  to  Anastasius  and 
Rusticus.  From  each  of  these  letters  the  passage  bearing  on  the  sub- 
ject is  quoted.  By  thus  following  up  the  ideas  of  the  Council  of  Elvira 
and  the  Council  of  Carthage  as  well  as  the  decretal  of  Siricius,  the  sub- 
deacon  was  included  among  those  who  were  vowed  to  celibacy,  for  he, 
too,  served  at  the  altar,  and  came  to  be  counted  as  one  of  the  major 
orders  of  the  ministry. 

Ep.  14,  Ch.  5.  Although  they  who  are  not  within  the 
ranks  of  the  clergy  are  free  to  take  pleasure  in  the  compan- 
ionship of  wedlock  and  the  procreation  of  children,  yet,  for 


4i8  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

the  sake  of  exhibiting  the  purity  of  complete  continence,  even 
subdeacons  are  not  allowed  carnal  marriage;  that  ''both 
they  that  have  wives  be  as  though  they  had  none"  [I  Cor. 
7  :  29],  and  they  that  have  not  may  remain  single.  But  if 
in  this  order,  which  is  the  fourth  from  the  head,  this  is  worthy 
to  be  observed,  how  much  more  is  it  to  be  kept  in  the  first, 
the  second,  and  the  third,  lest  any  one  be  reckoned  fit  for 
either  the  deacon's  duties  or  the  presbyter's  honorable  posi- 
tion, or  the  bishop's  pre-eminence,  who  is  discovered  as  not 
yet  having  bridled  his  uxorious  desires. 

Ep.  167,  Quest.  3.  Concerning  those  who  minister  at  the 
altar  and  have  wives,  whether  they  may  cohabit  with  them. 

Reply.  The  same  law  of  continence  is  for  the  ministers  of 
the  altar  as  for  the  bishops  and  priests  who,  when  they  were 
laymen,  could  lawfully  marry  and  procreate  children.  But 
when  they  attained  to  the  said  ranks,  what  was  before  lawful 
became  unlawful  for  them.  And  therefore  in  order  that  their 
wedlock  may  become  spiritual  instead  of  carnal,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  they  do  not  put  away  their  wives^  but  to  have  them 
"as  though  they  had  them  not,"  whereby  both  the  affection 
of  their  married  life  may  be  retained  and  the  marriage  func- 
tions cease. 

^  This  last  point  was  considerably  modified  by  the  subsequent  canon  law. 


PERIOD  II 

THE  CHURCH  FROM  THE  PERMANENT  DIVISION 
OF  THE  EMPIRE  UNTIL  THE  COLLAPSE  OF  THE 
WESTERN  EMPIRE  AND  THE  FIRST  SCHISM 
BETWEEN  THE  EAST  AND  THE  WEST,  OR  UN- 
TIL ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

In  the  second  period  of  the  history  of  the  Church  under  the 
Christian  Empire,  the  Church,  although  existing  in  two  di- 
visions of  the  Empire  and  experiencing  very  different  poKtical 
fortunes,  may  still  be  regarded  as  forming  a  whole.  The 
theological  controversies  distracting  the  Church,  although 
different  in  the  two  halves  of  the  Grasco-Roman  world,  were 
felt  to  some  extent  in  both  divisions  of  the  Empire  and  not 
merely  in  the  one  in  which  they  were  principally  fought  out; 
and  in  the  condemnation  of  heresy,  each  half  of  the  Church 
assisted  the  other.  Though  already  marked  lines  of  cleavage 
are  clearly  perceptible,  and  in  the  West  the  dominating  per- 
sonahty  of  Augustine  forwarded  the  development  of  the  char- 
acteristic theology  of  the  West,  setting  aside  the  Greek  in- 
fluences exerted  through  Hilary,  Ambrose,  Rufinus,  and  Je- 
rome, and  adding  much  that  was  never  appreciated  in  the  East 
— yet  the  opponent  of  Augustine  was  condemned  at  the  general 
council  of  Ephesus,  431,  held  by  Eastern  bishops  in  the  East; 
and  at  the  same  time  in  the  East  the  controversies  regarding 
the  union  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in  Christ,  although 
of  interest  almost  entirely  in  the  East  and  fought  out  by  men 
of  the  East,  found  their  preliminary  solution  at  Chalcedon 
in  451  upon  a  basis  proposed  by  the  West.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  attitudes  of  the  two  halves  of  the  Church  toward 

419 


420  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

many  profound  problems  were  radically  different,  and  the 
emergence  of  the  Roman  See  as  the  great  centre  of  the  West 
amid  the  overturn  of  the  Roman  world  by  the  barbarians, 
and  the  steadily  increasing  ascendency  of  the  State  over  the 
Church  in  the  East  tended  inevitably  to  separate  ecclesiastic- 
ally as  well  as  politically  the  two  divisions  of  the  Empire. 
As  the  emperors  of  the  East  attempted  to  use  dogmatic 
parties  in  the  support  of  a  political  poKcy,  the  differences 
between  the  Church  of  the  East,  under  the  Roman  Emperor, 
and  the  Church  of  the  West,  where  the  imperial  authority 
had  ceased  to  be  a  reality,  became  manifest  in  a  schism  re- 
sulting from  the  Monophysite  controversy  and  the  attempt  to 
reconcile  the  Monophy sites. 

CHAPTER  I.  THE  CHURCH  AT  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE 
PERMANENT  SEPARATION  OF  THE  TWO  PARTS  OF 
THE  ROMAN  EMPIRE 

Although  Theodosius  the  Great  had  been  the  dominating 
power  in  the  government  of  the  Empire  almost  from  his  acces- 
sion in  379,  he  was  sole  ruler  of  the  united  Roman  Empire  for 
only  a  few  months  before  his  death  in  395.  The  East  and  the 
West  became  henceforth  permanently  divided  after  having 
been  united,  since  the  reorganization  of  the  Empire  under  Dio- 
cletian in  285,  for  only  three  periods  aggregating  twenty-eight 
years  in  all.  The  imperial  authority  was  divided  between  the 
sons  of  Theodosius,  Arcadius  taking  the  sovereignty  of  the 
East  and  Honorius  that  of  the  West.  Stilicho,  a  Vandal, 
directed  the  fortunes  of  the  West  until  his  death  in  408,  but 
the  Empire  of  the  East  soon  began  to  take  a  leading  part, 
especially  after  the  barbarians  commenced  to  invade  the 
West  about  405,  and  to  establish  independent  kingdoms  with- 
in the  boundaries  of  the  Empire.  The  German  tribes  that 
settled  within  the  Empire  were  either  Arians  when  they 
entered  or  became  such  almost  immediately  after;  this  Arian- 
ism  had  been  introduced  among  the  West  Goths  from  Con- 


THE  DYNASTY  OF  THEODOSIUS  421 

stantinople  during  the  dominance  of  that  creed.  The  Franks 
alone  of  all  the  Germanic  tribes  were  heathen  when  they 
settled  within  the  Empire. 

§  79.     The  Empire  of  the  Dynasty  of  Theodosius. 
§  80.     The  Extension  of  the  Church  about  the  Beginning 
of  the  Fifth  Century. 

§  79.    The  Empire  of  the  Dynasty  of  Theodosius 
Emperors  of  the  West: 

Honorius;  born  384,  Emperor  395-423. 
Valentinian   III;  born   419,    Emperor   425-455;  son   of 
Galla  Placidia,  the  daughter  of  Theodosius  the  Great, 
and  the  Empress  of  the  West  419-450. 
Emperors  of  the  East: 

Arcadius:  born  377,  Emperor  395-408. 
Theodosius  II:  born  401,  Emperor  408-450. 
Marcianus:    Emperor   450-457;    husband    of   Pulcheria 
(born  399,  died  453),  daughter  of  Arcadius. 

The  greatest  event  in  the  first  half  of  the  fifth  century,  the 
period  in  which  the  degenerate  descendants  of  Theodosius 
still  retained  the  imperial  title,  was  the  Barbarian  Invasion, 
a  truly  epoch-making  event.  In  405  the  Vandals,  Alans, 
and  Suevi  crossed  the  Rhine,  followed  later  by  the  Bur- 
gundians.  August  24,  410,  Alarich,  the  king  of  the  West 
Goths,  captured  Rome.  In  419  the  West  Gothic  kingdom 
was  estabhshed  with  Toulouse  as  a  capital.  In  429  the  Van- 
dals began  to  establish  themselves  in  North  Africa,  and  about 
450  the  Saxons  began  to  invade  Britain,  abandoned  by  the 
Romans  about  409.  Although  the  West  was  thus  falling  to 
pieces,  the  theory  of  the  unity  of  the  Empire  was  maintained 
and  is  expressed  in  the  provision  of  the  new  Theodosian  Code 
of  439  for  the  uniformity  of  law  throughout  the  two  parts  of 
the  Empire.  This  theory  of  unity  was  not  lost  for  centuries 
and  was  influential  even  into  the  eighth  century. 

(a)  Jerome,  Ep.  123,  ad  Ageruchiam.     (MSL,  22  :  1057.) 


422  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

The  Barbarian  Invasions  in  the  opening  years  of  the  fifth  century, 
Jerome's  letters  are  not  to  be  considered  a  primary  source  for  the 
barbarian  invasion,  but  they  are  an  admirable  source  for  the  way  the 
invasion  appeared  to  a  man  of  culture  and  some  patriotic  feeling. 
With  this  passage  should  be  compared  his  Ep.  60,  ad  Heliodorum,  §  16, 
written  in  396,  in  which  he  expresses  his  belief  that  Rome  was  falling 
and  describes  the  barbarian  invaders.  The  following  letter  was  writ- 
ten 409. 

§  16.  Innumerable  savage  tribes  have  overrun  all  parts 
of  Gaul.  The  whole  country  between  the  Alps  and  the 
Pyrenees,  between  the  Rhine  and  the  ocean,  have  been  laid 
waste  by  Quadi,  Vandals,  Sarmatians,  Alans,  Gepidi,  Herules,^ 
Saxons,  Bergundians,  Allemans  and,  alas  for  the  common 
weal — even  the  hordes  of  the  Pannonians.  For  Asshur  is 
joined  with  them  (Psalm  83  :  8).  The  once  noble  city  of 
Mainz  has  been  captured  and  destroyed.  In  its  church  many 
thousands  have  been  massacred.  The  people  of  Worms  have 
been  extirpated  after  a  long  siege.  The  powerful  city  of 
Rheims,  the  Ambiani  [a  tribe  near  Amiens],  the  Altrabtae 
[a  tribe  near  Arras],  the  Belgians  on  the  outskirts  of  the  world, 
Tournay,  Speyer,  and  Strassburg  have  fallen  to  Germany. 
The  provinces  of  Aquitaine  and  of  the  Nine  Nations,  of 
Lyons  and  Narbonne,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  cities,  all 
have  been  laid  waste.  Those  whom  the  sword  spares  without, 
famine  ravages  within.  I  cannot  speak  of  Toulouse  without 
tears;  it  has  been  kept  hitherto  from  falling  by  the  merits  of 
its  revered  bishop,  Exuperius.  Even  the  Spains  are  about  to 
perish  and  tremble  daily  as  they  recall  the  invasion  of  the 
Cymri;  and  what  others  have  suffered  once  they  suffer  con- 
tinually in  fear. 

§  17.  I  am  silent  about  other  places,  that  I  may  not  seem 
to  despair  of  God's  mercy.  From  the  Pontic  Sea  to  the 
Julian  Alps,  what  was  once  ours  is  ours  no  longer.  When 
for  thirty  years  the  barrier  of  the  Danube  had  been  broken 
there  was  war  in  the  central  provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
Long  use  dried  our  tears.     For  all,  except  a  few  old  people, 

^  See  Putzger,  Historlscher  Sdml-Atlas,  1905. 


THE  DYNASTY  OF  THEODOSIUS  423 

had  been  born  either  in  captivity  or  during  a  blockade,  and 
they  did  not  long  for  a  liberty  which  they  had  never  known. 
'Who  will  believe  it?  What  histories  will  seriously  discuss 
it,  that  Rome  has  to  fight  within  her  borders,  not  for  glory 
but  for  bare  life;  and  that  she  does  not  fight  even,  but  buys 
the  right  to  exist  by  giving  gold  and  sacrificing  all  her  sub- 
stance ?  This  humiliation  has  been  brought  upon  her,  not  by 
the  fault  of  her  emperors,  both  of  them  most  religious  men 
[Arcadius  and  Honorius],  but  by  the  crime  of  a  half-barbarian 
traitor,^  who  with  our  money  has  armed  our  foes  against  us. 

(b)  Jerome,  Prefaces  to  Commentary  on  Ezekiel.  (MSL,  25. 
15:75-) 

The  fall  of  Rome. 

Jerome's  account  of  the  capture  of  Rome  by  Alarich  is  greatly  exag- 
gerated (see  his  Ep.  127,  ad  Principiam).  By  his  very  exaggeration, 
however,  one  gains  some  impression  of  the  shock  the  event  must  have 
occasioned  in  the  Roman  world. 

Preface  to  Book  I.  Intelligence  has  suddenly  been  brought 
to  me  of  the  death  of  Pammachus  and  Marcella,  the  siege  of 
Rome  [A.  D.  408],  and  the  falling  asleep  of  many  of  my  breth- 
ren and  sisters.  I  was  so  stupefied  and  dismayed  that  day 
and  night  I  could  think  of  nothing  but  the  welfare  of  all.  .  .  . 
But  when  the  bright  fight  of  all  the  world  was  put  out,^  or, 
rather,  when  the  Roman  Empire  was  decapitated,  and,  to  speak 
more  correctly,  the  whole  world  perished  in  one  city,  *'I  be- 
came dumb  and  humbled  myself,  and  kept  silence  from  good 
words,  but  my  grief  broke  out  afresh,  my  heart  was  hot  within 
me,  and  while  I  was  musing  the  fire  was  kindled"  [Psalm 

39:3,  4]- 

Preface  to  Book  III.  Who  would  befieve  that  Rome,  built 
up  by  the  conquest  of  the  whole  world,  had  collapsed ;  that  she 
had  become  both  the  mother  of  nations  and  their  tomb;  that 
all  the  shores  of  the  East,  of  Egypt,  of  Africa,  which  had  once 

^  Stilicho,  on  whose  advice  the  Senate  granted  a  subsidy  to  Alarich,  in  408, 
of  four  thousand  pounds  of  gold. 

2  Capture  of  Rome,  A.  D.  410,  by  Alarich. 


424  THE   CHURCH   TO   ABOUT   A.  D.  500 

belonged  to  the  imperial  city  should  be  filled  with  the  hosts 
of  her  men-servants  and  maid-servants;  that  every  day  holy 
Bethlehem  should  be  receiving  as  mendicants  men  and  women 
who  were  once  noble  and  abounding  in  every  kind  of  wealth? 

(c)  Theodosius  II,  Novella  I,  de  Theodosiani  Codicis  Auc- 
toritate;  Feb.  15,  439. 

The  Emperors  Theodosius  and  Valentinian,  Augusti,  to 
Florentius,  Praetorian  Prefect  of  the  East. 

Our  clemency  has  often  been  at  a  loss  to  understand  the 
cause  of  the  fact  that,  although  so  many  rewards  are  held  out 
for  the  maintenance  of  arts  and  studies,  so  few  and  rare  are 
they  who  are  fully  endowed  with  a  knowledge  of  the  civil  law, 
and  that  although  so  many  have  grown  pale  from  late  studies, 
scarcely  one  or  two  have  gained  a  sound  and  complete  learn- 
ing. When  we  consider  the  enormous  multitude  of  books, 
the  diversity  in  the  forms  of  process,  and  the  difficulty  of 
legal  cases,  and,  further,  the  huge  mass  of  imperial  constitu- 
tions which,  hidden  as  it  were  under  a  veil  of  gross  mist  and 
darkness,  precludes  man's  intellect  from  gaining  a  knowledge 
of  them,  we  have  performed  a  task  needful  for  our  age,  and, 
the  darkness  having  been  dispelled,  we  have  given  light  to  the 
laws  by  a  brief  compendium.  Noble  men  of  approved  faith- 
fulness were  selected,  men  of  well-known  learning,  to  whom 
the  matter  was  intrusted.  We  have  pubfished  the  constitu- 
tions of  former  princes,  cleared  by  interpretation  of  difficulties 
so  that  men  may  no  longer  have  to  wait  formidable  responses 
from  expert  lawyers  as  from  a  shrine,  since  it  is  quite  plain 
what  is  the  value  of  a  donation,  by  what  action  an  inheritance 
is  to  be  sued  for,  with  what  words  a  contract  is  to  be  made. 
.  .  .  Thus  having  wiped  out  the  cloud  of  volumes,  on  which 
many  wasted  their  lives  and  explained  nothing  in  the  end,  we 
establish  a  compendious  knowledge  of  the  imperial  constitu- 
tions since  the  time  of  the  divine  Constantine,  and  permit  no 
one  after  the  first  day  of  next  January  to  use  in  courts  and 
daily  practice  of  law  the  imperial  law,  or  to  draw  up  pleadings 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  THE  CHURCH    425 

except  from  these  books  which  bear  our  name  and  are  kept 
in  the  sacred  archives.  .  .  . 

To  this  we  add  that  henceforward  no  constitution  can  be 
passed  in  the  West  or  in  any  other  place  by  the  unconquerable 
Emperor,  the  son  of  our  clemency,  the  everlasting  Augustus 
Valentinian,  or  possess  any  legal  validity,  except  the  same  by 
a  divine  pragmatica  be  communicated  to  us.  The  same  rule 
is  to  be  observed  in  the  acts  which  are  promulgated  by  us  in 
the  East;  and  those  are  to  be  condemned  as  spurious  which 
are  not  recorded  in  the  Theodosian  Code  [certain  documents 
excepted  which  were  kept  in  the  registers  of  bureaux]. 

§  80.  The  Extension  of  the  Church  about  the  Begin- 
ning OF  THE  Fifth  Century 

The  most  important  missionary  work  in  the  early  part  of 
the  fifth  century  was  the  extension  of  the  work  of  Ulfilas 
among  the  German  tribes  and  the  work  of  the  missionaries  of 
the  West  in  Gaul  and  western  Germany.  Of  the  latter  the 
most  important  was  Martin  of  Tours. 

(a)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  H,  41.     (MSG,  67  :  349.) 

Ulfilas. 

Additional  material  for  the  life  of  Ulfilas  may  be  found  in  the  Eccle- 
siastical History  of  Philostorgius,  fragments  of  which,  as  preserved,  may 
be  found  appended  to  the  Bohn  translation  of  Sozomen's  Ecclesiastical 
History. 

After  giving  a  list  of  creeds  put  forth  by  various  councils,  from 
Nicaea  down  to  the  Arian  creed  of  Constantinople,  360  (text  may  be 
found  in  Hahn,  §  167),  Socrates  continues: 

The  last  creed  was  that  put  forth  at  Constantinople  [A.  D. 
360],  with  the  appendix.  For  to  this  was  added  the  pro- 
hibition respecting  the  mention  of  substance  [ousia],  or  sub- 
sistence [hypostasis],  in  relation  to  God.  To  this  creed 
Ulfilas,  bishop  of  the  Goths,  then  first  gave  his  assent.  For 
before  that  time  he  had  adhered  to  the  faith  of  Nicasa;  for  he 
was  a  disciple  of  Theophilus,  bishop  of  the  Goths,  who  was 
present  at  the  Nicene  Council,  and  subscribed  what  was  there 
determined. 


426  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

(b)  Ulfilas,  Confession  of  Faith.     Hahn,  §  198. 

This  confession  of  faith,  which  Ulfilas  describes  as  his  testament,  is 
found  at  the  conclusion  of  a  letter  of  Auxentius,  his  pupil,  an  Arian 
bishop  of  Silistria,  in  Moesia  Inferior;  see  note  of  Hahn.  It  should  be 
compared  with  that  of  Constantinople  of  360. 

1,  Ulfilas,  bishop  and  confessor,  have  always  thus  believed, 
and  in  this  sole  and  true  faith  I  make  my  testament  before 
my  Lord:  I  beHeve  that  there  is  one  God  the  Father,  alone 
unbegotten  and  invisible;  and  in  His  only  begotten  Son,  our 
Lord  and  God,  the  fashioner  and  maker  of  all  creation,  not 
having  any  one  like  him — therefore  there  is  one  God  of  all, 
who,  in  our  opinion,  is  God — and  there  is  one  Holy  Spirit,  the 
illuminating  and  sanctifying  power — as  Christ  said  to  his 
apostles  for  correction,  "Behold  I  send  the  promise  of  my 
Father  to  you,  but  remain  ye  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  until  ye 
be  indued  with  power  from  on  high";  and  again,  ''And  ye 
shall  receive  power  coming  upon  you  from  the  Holy  Spirit" 
— neither  God  nor  Lord,  but  a  minister  of  Christ  in  all  things; 
not  ruler,  but  a  subject,  and  obedient  in  all  things  to  the  Son, 
and  the  Son  himself  subject  and  obedient  in  all  things  to  his 
Father  .  .  .  through  Christ  .  .  .  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  .  .  .^ 

(c)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  23.     (MSG,  67  :  551.) 

The  barbarians  dwelling  beyond  the  Danube,  who  are  called 
Goths,  having  been  engaged  in  a  civil  war  among  themselves, 
were  divided  into  two  parties;  of  one  of  these  Fritigernus  was 
the  leader,  of  the  other  Athanaric.  When  Athanaric  had 
obtained  an  evident  advantage  over  his  rival,  Fritigernus 
had  recourse  to  the  Romans  and  implored  their  assistance 
against  his  adversary.  When  these  things  were  reported  to  the 
Emperor  Valens  [364-378],  he  ordered  the  troops  garrisoned 
in  Thrace  to  assist  those  barbarians  against  the  barbarians 
fighting  against  them.  They  won  a  complete  victory  over 
Athanaric  beyond  the  Danube,  totally  routing  the  enemy. 
This  was  the  reason  why  many  of  the  barbarians  became 

^The  termination  is  fragmentary. 


THE  EXTENSION  OF  THE   CHURCH         427 

Christians:  for  Fritigernus,  to  show  his  gratitude  to  the  Em- 
peror for  the  kindness  shown  him,  embraced  the  religion  of 
the  Emperor,  and  urged  those  under  him  to  do  the  same. 
Therefore  it  is  that  even  to  this  present  time  so  many  of  the 
Goths  are  infected  with  the  rehgion  of  Arianism,  because  the 
emperors  at  that  time  gave  themselves  to  that  faith.  Ulfilas, 
the  bishop  of  the  Goths  at  that  time,  invented  the  Gothic  let- 
ters and,  translating  the  Holy  Scriptures  into  their  own  lan- 
guage, undertook  to  instruct  these  barbarians  in  the  divine 
oracles.  But  when  Ulfilas  taught  the  Christian  religion  not 
only  to  the  subjects  of  Fritigernus  but  to  the  subjects  of 
Athanaric  also,  Athanaric,  regarding  this  as  a  violation  of  the 
privileges  of  the  religion  of  his  ancestors,  subjected  many  of 
the  Christians  to  severe  punishments,  so  that  many  of  the 
Arian  Goths  of  that  time  became  martyrs.  Arius,  indeed, 
failing  to  refute  the  opinion  of  Sabellius  the  Libyan,  fell  from 
the  true  faith  and  asserted  that  the  Son  of  God  was  a  new 
God ;  but  the  barbarians,  embracing  Christianity  with  greater 
simplicity,  despised  this  present  Hfe  for  the  faith  of  Christ. 

{d)  Sulpicius  Severus,  Vita  S.  Martini,  13.    (MSL,  20  :  167.) 

Sulpicius  Severus  was  a  pupil  of  Martin  of  Tours,  and  wrote  the  life 
of  his  master  during  the  latter's  lifetime  (died  397),  but  published  it 
after  his  death.  He  wrote  also  other  works  on  Martin.  The  astound- 
ing miracles  they  contain  present  curious  problems  for  the  student 
of  ethics  as  well  as  of  history.  As  St.  Martin  was  one  of  the  most 
popular  saints  of  Gaul,  and  in  this  case  the  merits  of  the  man  and  his 
reputation  as  a  saint  were  in  accord,  the  works  of  Sulpicius  became  the 
basis  of  many  popular  lives  of  the  saint.  The  following  passage  illus- 
trates the  embellishment  which  soon  became  attached  to  all  the.  lives 
of  religious  heroes.  It  is,  however,  one  of  the  least  astounding  of  the 
many  miracles  the  author  relates  in  apparent  good  faith.  Whatever 
may  be  the  judgment  regarding  the  miracle,  the  story  contains  several 
characteristic  touches  met  with  in  the  history  of  missions  in  the  follow- 
ing centuries:  e.  g.,  the  destruction  of  heathen  temples  and  objects  of 
worship.  This  sacred  tree  also  finds  its  duplicate  in  other  attacks  upon 
heathen  sanctuaries. 

Ch.  13.  When  in  a  certain  village  he  had  demolished  a  very 
ancient  temple,  and  had  set  about  cutting  down  a  pine-tree, 


428  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

which  stood  close  to  the  temple,  the  chief  priest  of  that  place 
and  a  crowd  of  other  heathen  began  to  oppose  him.  And 
though  these  people,  under  the  influence  of  the  Lord,  had 
been  quiet  while  the  temple  was  being  overthrown,  they  could 
not  patiently  allow  the  tree  to  be  cut  down.  Martin  care- 
fully instructed  them  that  there  was  nothing  sacred  in  the 
trunk  of  a  tree;  let  them  rather  follow  God,  whom  he  himself 
served.  He  added  that  it  was  necessary  that  that  tree  be  cut 
down,  because  it  had  been  dedicated  to  a  demon  [i.  e.,  to  a 
heathen  deity].  Then  one  of  them,  who  was  bolder  than  the 
others,  said:  ''If  you  have  any  trust  in  the  God  whom  you 
say  you  worship,  we  ourselves  will  cut  down  this  tree,  you  shall 
receive  it  when  it  falls;  for  if,  as  you  declare,  your  Lord  is 
with  you,  you  will  escape  all  injury."  Then  Martin,  coura- 
geously trusting  in  the  Lord,  promised  that  he  would  do  this. 
Thereupon  all  that  crowd  of  heathen  agreed  to  the  condition; 
for  they  held  the  loss  of  their  tree  a  small  matter,  if  only  they 
got  the  enemy  of  their  religion  buried  beneath  its  fall.  Ac- 
cordingly when  that  pine-tree  was  hanging  over  in  one  direc- 
tion, so  that  there  was  no  doubt  as  to  what  side  it  would  fall 
on  being  cut,  Martin,  having  been  bound,  was,  in  accordance 
with  the  decision  of  these  pagans,  placed  in  that  spot  where, 
as  no  one  doubted,  the  tree  was  about  to  fall.  They  began, 
therefore,  to  cut  down  their  own  tree  with  great  joy  and 
mirth.  At  some  distance  there  was  a  great  multitude  of 
wondering  spectators.  And  now  the  pine-tree  began  to  totter 
and  to  threaten  its  own  ruin  by  falling.  The  monks  at  a  dis- 
tance grew  pale  and,  terrified  by  the  danger  ever  coming 
nearer,  had  lost  all  hope  and  confidence,  expecting  only  the 
death  of  Martin.  But  he,  trusting  in  the  Lord,  and  waiting 
courageously,  when  now  the  falling  pine  had  uttered  its  expir- 
ing crash,  while  it  was  now  falling,  while  it  was  just  rushing 
upon  him,  with  raised  hand  put  in  its  way  the  sign  of  sal- 
vation [i.  e.,  the  sign  of  the  cross].  Then,  indeed,  after  the 
manner  of  a  spinning  top  (one  might  have  thought  it  driven 
back)  it  fell  on  the  opposite  side,  so  that  it  almost  crushed  the 


THE   EXTENSION  OF  THE   CHURCH  429 

rustics,  who  had  been  standing  in  a  safe  spot.  Then  truly  a 
shout  was  raised  to  heaven;  the  heathen  were  amazed  by 
the  miracle;  the  monks  wept  for  joy;  and  the  name  of  Christ 
was  extolled  by  all  in  common.  The  well-known  result  was 
that  on  that  day  salvation  came  to  that  region.  For  there 
was  hardly  one  of  that  immense  multitude  of  heathen  who  did 
not  desire  the  imposition  of  hands,  and,  abandoning  his  im- 
pious errors,  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus.  Certainly,  before 
the  times  of  Martin,  very  few,  nay,  almost  none,  in  those 
regions  had  received  the  name  of  Christ;  but  through  his 
virtues  and  example  it  has  prevailed  to  such  an  extent  that 
now  there  is  no  place  there  which  is  not  filled  with  either  very 
crowded  churches  or  monasteries.  For  wherever  he  de- 
stroyed heathen  temples,  there  he  was  accustomed  to  build, 
immediately,  either  churches  or  monasteries. 

CHAPTER  II.     THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  WESTERN  EMPIRE 
IN  THE  FIFTH  CENTURY 

The  period  between  the  closing  years  of  the  fourth  century, 
in  which  the  struggle  was  still  going  on  between  heathenism 
and  Christianity  (§  81),  and  the  end  of  the  Roman  Empire 
of  the  West  is  of  fundamental  importance  in  the  study  of  the 
history  of  the  Christian  Church  of  the  West.  In  this  period 
were  laid  the  foundations  for  its  characteristic  theology  and 
its  ecclesiastical  organization.  The  former  was  the  work  of 
St.  Augustine,  the  most  powerful  religious  personality  of  the 
Western  Church.  In  this  he  built  partly  upon  the  traditions 
of  the  West,  but  also,  largely,  upon  his  own  rehgious  experience 
(§  82).  These  elements  were  developed  and  modified  by  the 
two  great  controversies  in  which,  by  discussion,  he  formulated 
more  completely  than  ever  had  been  done  before  the  idea 
of  the  Church  and  its  sacraments  in  opposition  to  the  Donatists 
(§  83),  and  the  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace  in  opposition  to  a 
moralistic  Christianity,  represented  by  Pelagius  (§  84).  The 
leading  ideas  of  Augustine,  however,  could  be  appropriated 
only  as  they  were  modified  and  brought  into  conformity  with 


430  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

the  dominant  ecclesiastical  and  sacramental  system  of  the 
Church,  in  the  semi-Pelagian  controversy,  which  found  a  tardy 
termination  in  the  sixth  century  (§  85).  In  the  meanwhile 
the  inroads  of  the  barbarians  with  all  the  horrors  of  the  in- 
vasions, the  confusion  in  the  pohtical,  social,  and  ecclesiastical 
organization,  threatened  the  overthrow  of  all  established  in- 
stitutions. In  the  midst  of  this  anarchy,  the  Roman  See,  in 
the  work  of  Innocent  I,  and  still  more  clearly  in  the  work  of 
Leo  the  Great,  enunciated  its  ideals  and  became  the  centre, 
not  merely  of  ecclesiastical  unity,  in  which  it  had  often  to 
contest  its  claims  with  the  divided  Church  organizations  of  the 
West,  but  still  more  as  the  ideal  centre  of  unity  for  all  those 
that  held  to  the  old  order  of  the  Empire  with  its  culture  and 
social  life  (§  86). 


§82 
§83 
§84 
§85 
§86 


The  Western  Church  toward  the  End  of  the  Fourth 

Century. 
Augustine's  Life  and  Place  in  Western  Thought. 
Augustine  and  the  Donatist  Schism. 
The  Pelagian  Controversy. 
The  semi-Pelagian  Controversy. 
The  Roman  Church  as  the  Centre  of  the  Catholic 

Roman  Element  of  the  West. 


§81.    The  Western  Church  Toward  the  End  of  the 
Fourth  Century 

Heathenism  lingered  as  a  force  in  society  longer  in  the  West 
than  in  the  East,  not  merely  among  the  peasantry,  but  among 
the  higher  classes.  This  was  partly  due  to  the  conservatism 
of  the  aristocratic  classes  and  the  superior  form  in  which  the 
religious  philosophy  of  Neo-Platonism  had  been  presented  to 
the  West.  This  presentation  was  due,  in  no  small  part,  to  the 
work  of  such  philosophers  as  Victorinus,  who  translated  the 
earlier  works  of  the  Neo-Platonists  so  that  it  escaped  the  tend- 
encies, represented  by  Jamblichus,  toward  theurgy  and  magic, 
and  an  alliance  with  polytheism  and  popular  superstition. 
Victorinus  himself  became  a  Christian,  passing  by  an  easy 


I 


THE  WESTERN   CHURCH  431 

transition  from  Neo-Platonism  to  Christianity;  a  course  in 
which  he  was  followed  by  Augustine,  and,  no  doubt,  by  others 
as  well. 

Augustine,  Conjessiones,  VIH,  2.     (MSL,  32  :  79.) 

The  conversion  of  Victorinus. 

To  Simplicianus  then  I  went — the  father  of  Ambrose,^  in 
receiving  Thy  grace, ^  and  whom  he  truly  loved  as  a  father. 
To  him  I  narrated  the  windings  of  my  error.  But  when  I 
mentioned  to  him  that  I  had  read  certain  books  of  the  Platon- 
ists,  which  Victorinus,  formerly  professor  of  rhetoric  at  Rome 
(who  died  a  Christian,  as  I  had  heard),  had  translated  into 
Latin,  he  congratulated  me  that  I  had  not  fallen  upon  the 
writings  of  other  philosophers,  which  were  full  of  fallacies 
and  deceit,  "after  the  rudiments  of  this  world"  [Col.  2  :  8], 
whereas  they,  in  many  respects,  led  to  the  behef  in  God  and 
His  word.  Then  to  exhort  me  to  the  humihty  of  Christ, 
hidden  from  the  wise  and  revealed  to  babes,  he  spoke  of  Vic- 
torinus himself,  whom,  while  he  was  in  Rome,  he  had  known 
intimately;  and  of  him  he  related  that  about  which  I  will  not 
be  silent.  For  it  contained  great  praise  of  Thy  grace,  which 
ought  to  be  confessed  unto  Thee,  how  that  most  learned  old 
man,  highly  skilled  in  all  the  liberal  sciences,  who  had  read, 
criticised,  and  explained  so  many  works  of  the  philosophers; 
the  teacher  of  so  many  noble  senators,  who,  also,  as  a  mark  of 
his  excellent  discharge  of  his  duties,  had  both  merited  and 
obtained  a  statue  in  the  Roman  Forum  (something  men  of 
this  world  esteem  a  great  honor),  he,  who  had  been,  even  to 
that  age,  a  worshipper  of  idols  and  a  participator  in  the  sac- 
rilegious rites  to  which  almost  all  the  nobihty  of  Rome  were 
addicted,  and  had  inspired  the  people  with  the  love  of  "mon- 
ster gods  of  every  sort,  and  the  barking  Anubis,  who  hold 
their  weapons  against  Neptune  and  Venus  and  Minerva" 
[Vergil,  jEneid,  VIII,  736  ff.],  and  those  whom  Rome  once 
conquered,  she  now  worshipped,  all  of  which  Victorinus,  now 

^At  the  time  a  bishop.  ^Z,  e.,  Simplicianus  had  baptized  Ambrose. 


432  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

old,  had  defended  so  many  years  with  vain  language/  he 
now  blushed  not  to  be  a  child  of  Thy  Christ,  and  an  infant  at 
Thy  fountain,  submitting  his  neck  to  the  yoke  of  humihty, 
and  subduing  his  forehead  to  the  reproach  of  the  cross. 

O  Lord,  Lord,  who  hast  bowed  the  heavens  and  come  down, 
touched  the  mountains  and  they  smoked  [Psalm  144  :  5],  by 
what  means  didst  Thou  convey  Thyself  into  that  bosom?  He 
used  to  read,  SimpHcianus  said,  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  most 
studiously  sought  after  and  searched  out  all  the  Christian 
writings,  and  he  said  to  SimpHcianus,  not  openly,  but  secretly 
and  as  a  friend:  ''Knowest  thou  that  I  am  now  a  Christian?" 
To  which  he  replied:  "I  will  not  beHeve  it,  nor  will  I  rank 
you  among  the  Christians  unless  I  see  you  in  the  Church  of 
Christ."  Whereupon  he  repKed  derisively:  ''Do  walls  then 
make  Christians?"  And  this  he  often  said,  that  already  he 
was  a  Christian;  and  SimpHcianus  used  as  often  to  make  the 
same  answer,  and  as  often  the  conceit  of  the  walls  was  repeated. 
For  he  was  fearful  of  offending  his  friends,  proud  demon  wor- 
shippers, from  the  height  of  whose  Babylonian  pride,  as  from 
the  cedars  of  Lebanon,  which  the  Lord  had  not  yet  broken 
[Psalm  29  :  5],  he  seriously  thought  a  storm  of  enmity  would 
descend  upon  him.  But  after  that  he  had  derived  strength 
from  reading  and  inquiry,  and  feared  lest  he  should  be  denied 
by  Christ  before  the  holy  angels  if  he  was  now  afraid  to  con- 
fess Him  before  men  [Matt.  10  :  33],  and  appeared  to  himself 
to  be  guilty  of  a  great  fault  in  being  ashamed  of  the  sacra- 
ments of  the  humility  of  Thy  word,  and  not  being  ashamed 
of  the  sacrilegious  rites  of  those  proud  demons,  which  as  a 
proud  imitator  he  had  accepted,  he  became  bold-faced  against 
vanity  and  shamefaced  toward  the  truth,  and  suddenly  and 
unexpectedly  said  to  SimpHcianus,  as  he  himself  informed  me: 
''Let  us  go  to  the  Church;  I  wish  to  be  made  a  Christian." 
And  he,  unable  to  contain  himself  for  joy,  went  with  him. 
When  he  had  been  admitted  to  the  first  sacrament  of  instruc- 
tion [i.  e.,  the  Catechumenate],  he,  not  long  after,  gave  in  his 

1  This  is  hardly  fair  to  Victorinus  and  his  pre-Christian  religious  views. 


AUGUSTINE  433 

name  that  he  might  be  regenerated  by  baptism.  Meanwhile 
Rome  marvelled  and  the  Church  rejoiced ;  the  proud  saw  and 
were  enraged;  they  gnashed  with  their  teeth  and  melted 
away  [Psalm  92  :  9].  But  the  Lord  God  was  the  hope  of 
Thy  servant,  and  He  regarded  not  vanities  and  lying  mad- 
ness [Psalm  40  :  4]. 

Finally  the  hour  arrived  when  he  should  make  profession 
of  his  faith,  which,  at  Rome,  they,  who  are  about  to  approach 
Thy  grace,  are  accustomed  to  deliver  from  an  elevated  place, 
in  view  of  the  faithful  people,  in  a  set  form  of  words  learnt  * 
by  heart.  But  the  presbyters,  he  said,  offered  Victorinus 
the  privilege  of  making  his  profession  more  privately,  as  was 
the  custom  to  do  to  those  who  were  likely,  on  account  of  bash- 
fulness,  to  be  afraid;  but  he  chose,  rather,  to  profess  his  sal- 
vation in  the  presence  of  the  holy  assembly.  For  it  was  not 
salvation  that  he  had  taught  in  rhetoric  and  yet  he  had  pub- 
licly professed  that.  How  much  less,  therefore,  ought  he, 
when  pronouncing  Thy  word,  to  dread  Thy  meek  flock,  who, 
in  the  deHvery  of  his  own  words,  had  not  feared  the  mad  mul- 
titudes! So  then,  when  he  ascended  to  make  his  profession, 
and  all  recognized  him,  they  whispered  his  name  one  to  the 
other,  with  a  tone  of  congratulation.  And  who  was  there 
among  them  that  did  not  know  him?  And  there  ran  through 
the  mouths  of  all  the  rejoicing  multitude  a  low  murmur: 
"Victorinus!  Victorinus!"  Sudden  was  the  burst  of  exulta- 
tion at  the  sight  of  him,  and  as  sudden  the  hush  of  attention  ^ 
that  they  might  hear  him.  He  pronounced  the  true  faith 
with  an  excellent  confidence,  and  all  desired  to  take  him  to 
their  hearts,  and  by  their  love  and  joy  they  did  take  him  to 
them;  such  were  the  hands  with  which  they  took  him. 

§  82.    Augustine's    Life    and    Place    in    the    Western 

Church 

Aurelius  Augustinus,  the  greatest  of  the  Latin  fathers,  was 
born  354,  at  Tagaste,  in  Numidia.  He  was  educated  to  be  a 
teacher  of  rhetoric,  and  practised  his  profession  at  Carthage, 


434  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Rome,  and  Milan.  From  374  to  383,  he  was  a  Manichaean 
catechumen,  for  although  his  mother,  Monnica,  was  a  Chris- 
tian, his  religious  education  had  been  very  meagre,  and  he 
was  repelled  by  the  literary  character  of  the  Scriptures  as 
commonly  interpreted.  In  387,  after  a  long  struggle,  and 
passing  through  various  schools  of  thought,  he,  with  his  son 
Adeodatus,  were  baptized  at  Milan  by  Ambrose.  In  391  he 
became  a  presbyter,  and  in  394  bishop  of  Hippo  Regius,  a 
small  town  in  North  Africa.  He  died  430,  during  the  Vandal 
invasion.  Of  his  works,  the  Confessions  are  the  most  widely 
known,  as  they  have  become  a  Christian  classic  of  edification 
of  the  first  rank.  They  give  an  account  of  his  early  life  and 
conversion,  but  are  more  useful  as  showing  his  type  of  piety 
than  as  a  biography.  From  them  is  learned  the  secret  of  his 
influence  upon  the  Western  world.  The  Hterary  activity  of 
Augustine  was  especially  developed  in  connection  with  the 
prolonged  controversies,  in  which  he  was  engaged  throughout 
his  episcopate  (see  §§  83,  84),  but  he  wrote  much  in  addition  to 
controversial  treatises.  The  group  of  characteristic  doctrines 
known  as  '' Angus tinianism,"  viz.:  Original  Sin,  Predestina- 
tion, and  Grace  and  the  doctrines  connected  with  them,  were, 
to  a  large  extent,  the  outcome  of  his  own  religious  experience. 
He  had  known  the  power  and  depth  of  sin.  He  had  discovered 
the  hand  of  God  leading  him  in  spite  of  himself.  He  knew 
that  his  conversion  was  due,  not  to  his  own  effort  or  merit, 
but  to  God's  grace. 

The  works  of  Augustine  have  been  translated  in  part  in 
PNF,  ser.  I,  vols.  I-VIII.  There  are  many  translations  of  the 
Confessions;  among  others,  one  by  E.  B.  Pusey,  in  "Library  of 
the  Fathers  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,"  reprinted  in 
"Everyman's  Library." 

(a)  Augustine,  Confessiones,  VIII,  12.     (MSL,  32  :  761.) 

The  conversion  of  Augustine. 

This  is,  perhaps,  the  most  famous  passage  in  the  Co?tfessions.  It 
came  at  the  end  of  a  long  series  of  attempts  to  find  peace  in  various 
forms  of  philosophy  and  religion.     Augustine  regarded  it  as  mirac- 


AUGUSTINE  435 

ulous,  the  crown  and  proof  of  the  work  of  grace  in  him.  The  scene 
was  in  Milan,  387,  in  the  garden  of  the  villa  he  occupied  with  his  friend 
Alypius.  The  principal  obstacle  to  his  embracing  Christianity  was  his 
reluctance  to  abandon  his  Hcentious  life.  To  this  the  reference  is  made 
in  the  passage  from  Scripture  which  he  read,  /.  e.,  Rom.  13  :  13,  14. 

When  a  profound  reflection  had,  from  the  depths  of  my 
soul,  drawn  together  and  heaped  up  all  my  misery  before  the 
sight  of  my  heart,  there  arose  a  mighty  storm,  accompanied 
by  as  mighty  a  shower  of  tears.  That  I  might  pour  it  all 
forth  in  its  own  words  I  arose  from  beside  Alypius;  for  sol- 
itude suggested  itself  to  me  as  fitter  for  the  business  of  weep- 
ing. So  I  retired  to  such  a  distance  that  even  his  presence 
could  not  be  oppressive  to  me.  Thus  it  was  with  me  at  that 
time,  and  he  perceived  it;  for  something,  I  beheve,  I  had 
spoken,  wherein  the  sound  of  my  voice  appeared  choked  with 
weeping,  and  thus  I  had  risen  up.  He  then  remained  where 
we  had  been  sitting,  very  greatly  astonished.  I  flung  myself 
down,  I  know  not  how,  under  a  certain  fig-tree,  giving  free 
course  to  my  tears,  and  the  streams  of  my  eyes  gushed  out, 
an  acceptable  sacrifice  unto  Thee.  And  not  indeed  in  these 
words,  yet  to  this  effect,  spake  I  much  unto  Thee — ''But  Thou, 
O  Lord,  how  long?"  [Psalm  13  :  i].  ''How  long,  Lord?  Wilt 
Thou  be  angry  forever?  Oh,  remember  not  against  us  former 
iniquities"  [Psalm  79  :  5,  8];  for  I  felt  that  I  was  held  fast 
by  them.  I  sent  up  these  sorrowful  cries:  "How  long,  how 
long?  To-morrow,  and  to-morrow?  Why  not  now?  Why  is 
there  not  this  hour  an  end  to  my  uncleanness?" 

I  was  saying  these  things  and  was  weeping  in  the  most  bit- 
ter contrition  of  my  heart,  when,  lo,  I  hear  the  voice  as  of  a 
boy  or  girl,  I  know  not  which,  coming  from  a  neighboring 
house,  chanting  and  oft  repeating:  "Take  up  and  read;  take 
up  and  read."  Immediately  my  countenance  was  changed, 
and  I  began  most  earnestly  to  consider  whether  it  was  usual  for 
children  in  any  kind  of  game  to  sing  such  words;  nor  could  I 
remember  ever  to  have  heard  the  like  anywhere.  So,  re- 
straining the  torrent  of  my  tears,  I  rose  up,  interpreting  it 
in  no  other  way  than  as  a  command  to  me  from  Heaven  to 


436  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

open  the  book  and  read  the  first  chapter  I  should  Hght  upon. 
For  I  had  heard  of  Anthony  [see  also  §  77,  ^],  that  accidentally 
coming  in  whilst  the  Gospel  was  being  read,  he  received  the 
admonition  as  if  what  was  read  was  addressed  to  him:  ''Go 
and  sell  that  thou  hast,  and  give  to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt 
have  treasure  in  heaven;  and  come  and  follow  me"  [Matt. 
19  :  21].  And  by  such  oracle  was  he  forthwith  converted  unto 
Thee.  So  quickly  I  returned  to  the  place  where  Alypius  was 
sitting;  for  there  had  I  put  down  the  volume  of  the  Apostles, 
when  I  rose  thence.  I  seized,  I  opened,  and  in  silence  I  read 
that  paragraph  on  which  my  eye  first  fell:  "Not  in  rioting 
and  drunkenness,  not  in  chambering  and  wantonness,  not  in 
strife  and  envying;  but  put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
make  not  provision  for  the  flesh  to  fulfil  the  lusts  thereof" 
[Rom.  13  :  13,  14].  No  further  would  I  read;  there  was  no 
need;  for  instantly,  as  the  sentence  ended,  by  a  light,  as  it 
were,  of  security  infused  into  my  heart,  all  the  gloom  of  doubt 
vanished  away. 

Closing  the  book,  then,  and  putting  either  my  finger  be- 
tween, or  some  other  mark,  I  now  with  a  tranquil  countenance 
made  it  known  to  Alypius.  And  he  thus  disclosed  to  me  what 
was  wrong  in  him,  which  I  knew  not.  He  asked  to  look  at 
what  I  had  read.  I  showed  him;  and  he  looked  even  further 
than  I  had  read,  and  I  knew  not  what  followed.  This,  in 
fact,  followed:  ''Him  that  is  weak  in  the  faith,  receive  ye" 
[Rom.  14  :i];  which  he  appHed  to  himself,  and  discovered 
to  me.  By  this  admonition  was  he  strengthened;  and  by  a 
good  resolution  and  purpose,  very  much  in  accord  with  his 
character  (wherein,  for  the  better,  he  was  always  far  different 
from  me),  without  any  restless  delay  he  joined  me.  Thence 
we  go  to  my  mother.  We  tell  her — she  rejoices.  We  relate 
how  it  came  to  pass — she  exults  and  triumphs,  and  she  blesses 
Thee,  who  art  "able  to  do  exceeding  abundantly  above  all 
that  we  ask  or  think"  [Eph.  3  :  20];  for  she  perceived  Thee  to 
have  given  her  more  for  me  than  she  used  to  ask  by  her  pitiful 
and  most  doleful  groanings.     For  Thou  didst  so  convert  me 


AUGUSTINE  437 

unto  Thyself,  that  I  sought  neither  a  wife,  nor  any  other 
hope  of  this  world — standing  in  that  rule  of  faith  in  which 
Thou,  so  many  years  before,  had  showed  me  unto  her.  And 
thou  didst  turn  her  grief  unto  gladness  [Psalm  30  :  11],  much 
more  plentiful  than  she  had  desired,  and  much  dearer  and 
chaster  than  she  used  to  crave,  by  having  grandchildren  of 
my  flesh. 

(b)  Augustine,  Confessiones,  X,  27,  29,  43.  (MSL,  32  :  795, 
796,  808.) 

The  following  passages  from  the  Confessions  are  intended  to  illus- 
trate Augustine's  type  of  piety. 

Ch.  29.  My  whole  hope  is  only  in  Thy  exceeding  great 
mercy.  Give  what  Thou  commandest  and  command  what 
Thou  wilt. 1  Thou  imposest  continency  upon  us.  "And  when 
I  perceived,"  saith  one,  ''that  no  one  could  be  continent  except 
God  gave  it;  and  this  was  a  point  of  wisdom  also  to  know 
whose  this  gift  was"  [Wis.  8  :  21].  For  by  continency  are  we 
bound  up  and  brought  into  one,  whence  we  were  scattered 
abroad  into  many.  For  he  loves  Thee  too  little,  who  besides 
Thee  loves  aught  which  he  loves  not  for  Thee.  O  love,  who 
ever  burnest  and  art  never  quenched!  0  charity,  my  God, 
kindle  me!  Thou  commandest  continency;  give  what  Thou 
commandest,  and  command  what  Thou  wilt. 

Ch.  27.  Too  late  have  I  loved  Thee,  0  fairness,  so  ancient, 
yet  so  new!  Too  late  have  I  loved  Thee.  For  behold  Thou 
wast  within  and  I  was  without,  and  I  was  seeking  Thee  there; 
I,  without  love,  rushed  heedlessly  among  the  things  of  beauty 
Thou  madest.  Thou  wast  with  me,  but  I  was  not  with  Thee. 
Those  things  kept  me  far  from  Thee,  which,  unless  they  were 
in  Thee,  were  not.  Thou  didst  call  and  cry  aloud,  and  Thou 
broke  through  my  deafness.  Thou  didst  gleam  and  shine 
and]  chase  away  my  blindness.  Thou  didst  exhale  fragrance 
and  I  drew  in  my  breath  and  I  panted  for  Thee.     I  tasted,  and 

^This  is  the  phrase  which  so  deeply  offended  Pelagius;  Da  quod  jtibes,  etjube 
quod  vis. 


438  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

did  hunger  and  thirst.     Thou  didst  touch  me,  and  I  burned 
for  Thy  peace. 

Ch.  43.  0  how  Thou  hast  loved  us,  O  good  Father,  who 
sparedst  not  thine  only  Son,  but  didst  deliver  Him  up  for  us 
wicked  ones!  [Rom.  8  :  32.]  O  how  Thou  hast  loved  us,  for 
whom  He,  who  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  Thee, 
'' became  obedient  unto  death,  even  the  death  of  the  cross" 
[Phil.  2  :  8].  He  alone,  ''free  among  the  dead"  [Psalm  88  :  5], 
that  had  power  to  lay  down  His  life,  and  power  to  take  it 
again  [John  10  :  18];  for  us  was  He  unto  Thee  both  victor 
and  the  victim,  and  the  victor  became  the  victim ;  for  He  was 
unto  Thee  both  priest  and  sacrifice,  and  priest  because  sac- 
rifice; making  us  from  being  slaves  to  become  Thy  sons,  by 
being  born  of  Thee,  and  by  serving  us.  Rightly,  then,  is  my 
strong  hope  in  Him,  because  Thou  didst  cure  all  my  diseases 
by  Him  who  sitteth  at  Thy  right  hand  and  maketh  interces- 
sion for  us  [Rom.  8  :  34] ;  else  should  I  utterly  despair.  For 
numerous  and  great  are  my  infirmities,  yea  numerous  and 
great  are  they;  but  Thy  medicine  is  greater.  We  might 
think  that  Thy  word  was  removed  from  union  with  man  and 
despair  of  ourselves  had  not  He  been  "made  flesh  and  dwelt 
among  us"  [John  i  :  14]. 

(c)  Augustine,  De  Civitate  Dei,  XIII,  3,  14.  (MSL,  41  : 
378;  86.) 

The  Fall  of  Man  and  Onginal  Sin. 

The  City  of  God  is  Augustine's  great  theodicy,  apology,  and  phi- 
losophy of  universal  history.  It  was  begun  shortly  after  the  capture 
of  Rome,  and  the  author  was  engaged  upon  it  from  413  to  426.  It  was 
the  source  whence  the  mediaeval  ecclesiastics  drew  their  theoretical 
justification  for  the  curialistic  principles  of  the  relation  of  State  and 
Church,  and  at  the  same  time  the  one  work  of  St.  Augustine  that  Gib- 
bon the  historian  regarded  highly.  For  an  analysis  see  Presensee, 
art.  "Augustine"  in  DCB. 

Compare  the  position  of  Augustine  with  the  following  passage  from 
St.  Ambrose,  On  the  Death  of  Satyrus,  II,  6,  "Death  is  alike  to  all, 
without  difference  for  the  poor,  without  exception  for  the  rich.  And 
so  although  through  the  sin  of  one  alone,  yet  it  passed  upon  all;  .  .  . 
In  Adam  I  fell,  in  Adam  I  was  cast  out  of  paradise.    In  Adam  I  died; 


AUGUSTINE  439 

how  shall  the  Lord  call  me  back,  except  He  find  me  in  Adam;  guilty 
as  I  was  in  him,  so  now  justified  in  Christ."     [MSL,  i6  :  1374.] 

The  first  men  would  not  have  suffered  death  if  they  had  not 
sinned.  .  .  .  But  having  become  sinners  they  were  so  pun- 
ished with  death,  that  whatsoever  sprang  from  their  stock 
should  also  be  punished  with  the  same  death.  For  nothing 
else  could  be  born  of  them  than  what  they  themselves  had 
been.  The  condemnation  changed  their  nature  for  the  worse 
in  proportion  to  the  greatness  of  their  sin,  so  that  what  was 
before  as  punishment  in  the  man  who  had  first  sinned,  fol- 
lowed as  of  nature  in  others  who  were  born.  ...  In  the  first 
man,  therefore,  the  whole  human  nature  was  to  be  transmitted 
by  the  woman  to  posterity  when  that  conjugal  union  received 
the  divine  sentence  of  its  own  condemnation;  and  what  man 
was  made,  not  when  he  was  created  but  when  he  sinned,  and 
was  punished,  this  he  propagated,  so  far  as  the  origin  of  sin 
and  death  are  concerned. 

Ch.  14.  For  God,  the  author  of  natures,  not  of  vices, 
created  man  upright;  but  man,  being  by  his  own  will  corrupt 
and  justly  condemned,  begot  corrupted  and  condemned  chil- 
dren. For  we  were  all  in  that  one  man  when  we  were  all  that 
one  man,  who  fell  into  sin  by  the  woman  who  had  been  made 
from  him  before  the  sin.  For  not  yet  was  the  particular  form 
created  and  distributed  to  us,  in  which  we  as  individuals  were 
to  live;  but  already  the  seminal  nature  was  there  from  which 
we  were  to  be  propagated ;  and  this  being  vitiated  by  sin,  and 
bound  by  the  chain  of  death,  and  justly  condemned,  man 
could  not  be  born  of  man  in  any  other  state.  And  thus  from 
the  bad  use  of  free  will,  there  originated  a  whole  series  of 
evils,  which  with  its  train  of  miseries  conducts  the  human 
race  from  its  depraved  origin,  as  from  a  corrupt  root,  on  to 
the  destruction  of  the  second  death,  which  has  no  end,  those 
only  being  excepted  who  are  freed  by  the  grace  of  God. 

{d)  Augustine,  De  CorrepHone  et  Gratia,  2.     (MSL,  44  :  917.) 
Grace  and  Free  Will. 


440  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Now  the  Lord  not  only  shows  us  what  evil  we  should  shun, 
and  what  good  we  should  do,  which  is  all  the  letter  of  the  law 
can  do;  but  moreover  He  helps  us  that  we  may  shun  evil  and 
do  good  [Psalm  37  127],  which  none  can  do  without  the  spirit 
of  grace;  and  if  this  be  wanting,  the  law  is  present  merely  to 
make  us  guilty  and  to  slay  us.  It  is  on  this  account  that  the 
Apostle  says:  "The  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life" 
[n  Cor.  3:6].  He,  then,  who  lawfully  uses  the  law,  learns 
therein  evil  and  good,  and  not  trusting  in  his  own  strength, 
flees  to  grace,  by  the  help  of  which  he  may  shun  evil  and  do 
good.  But  who  flees  to  grace  except  when  ''the  steps  of  a 
man  are  ordered  by  the  Lord,  and  He  wills  his  ways"? 
[Psalm  37  :  23.]  And  thus  also  to  desire  the  help  of  grace  is 
the  beginning  of  grace.  .  .  .  It  is  to  be  confessed,  therefore, 
that  we  have  free  choice  to  do  both  evil  and  good;  but  in  do- 
ing evil  every  one  is  free  from  righteousness  and  is  a  servant 
of  sin,  while  in  doing  good  no  one  can  be  free,  unless  he  have 
been  made  free  by  Him  who  said:  ''If  the  Son  shall  make 
you  free,  then  you  shall  be  free  indeed"  [John  8:36]. 
Neither  is  it  thus,  that  when  any  one  shall  have  been  made 
free  from  the  dominion  of  sin,  he  no  longer  needs  the  help 
of  his  Deliverer;  but  rather  thus,  that  hearing  from  Him, 
"Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing"  [John  15  :  5],  he  himself 
also  says  to  Him:    "Be  Thou  my  helper!     Forsake  me  not!" 

(e)  Augustine,  De  Civitate  Dei,  XV,  i.     (MSL,  41  :  437.) 

Predestination. 

Inasmuch"  as  all  men  are  born  condemned,  and  of  themselves  have 
not  the  power  to  turn  to  grace,  which  alone  can  save  them,  it  follows 
that  the  bestowal  of  grace  whereby  they  may  turn  is  not  dependent  upon 
the  man  but  upon  God's  sovereign  good  pleasure.  This  is  expressed  in 
the  doctrine  of  Predestination.  For  a  discussion  of  the  position  of 
Augustine  respecting  Predestination  and  his  other  doctrines  as  con- 
nected with  it,  see  J.  B.  Mozley,  A  Treatise  on  the  Augustinian  Doc- 
trine of  Predestination,  1873,  a  book  of  great  ability.  C/.  also  Tixeront, 
History  of  Dogmas,  vol.  11. 

I  trust  that  we  have  already  done  justice  to  these  great  and 
difficult  questions  regarding  the  beginning  of  the  world,  of 


AUGUSTINE  441 

the  soul,  and  of  the  human  race  itself.  This  race  we  have 
distributed  into  two  parts :  the  one  consisting  of  those  who  live 
according  to  man,  the  other  of  those  who  live  according  to 
God.  And  these  we  have  also  mystically  called  the  two  cities, 
or  the  two  communities  of  men,  of  which  one  is  predestined 
to  reign  eternally  with  God,  and  the  other  to  suffer  eternal 
punishment  with  the  devil.  .  .  . 

Each  man,  because  born  of  condemned  stock,  is  first  of  all 
born  from  Adam,  evil  and  carnal,  and  when  he  has  been  grafted 
into  Christ  by  regeneration  he  afterward  becomes  good  and 
spiritual.  So  in  the  human  race,  as  a  whole,  when  these  two 
cities  began  to  run  their  course  by  a  series  of  births  and  deaths, 
the  citizen  of  this  world  was  born  first,  and  after  him  the  stran- 
ger of  this  world,  and  belonging  to  the  City  of  God,^  pre- 
destined by  grace,  elected  by  grace,  by  grace  a  stranger  here 
below,  and  by  grace  a  citizen  above.  For  so  far  as  regards 
himself  he  is  sprung  from  the  same  mass,  all  of  which  is  con- 
demned in  its  origin;  but  God  Hke  a  potter  (for  this  com- 
parison is  introduced  by  the  Apostle  judiciously  and  not 
without  thought)  of  the  same  lump  made  one  vessel  to  honor 
and  another  to  dishonor  [Rom.  9  :  21]. 

(/)  Augustine,  De  Correptione  et  Gratia,  chs.  23  (9),  39  (13). 
(MSL,  44  :  930,  940.) 

Ch.  23  (9).  Whosoever,  therefore,  in  God's  most  providen- 
tial ordering  are  foreknown  [prcesciti]  and  predestinated,  called 
justified,  glorified — I  say  not,  even  though  not  yet  born  again, 
but  even  though  not  yet  born  at  all — are  already  children  of 
God,  and  absolutely  cannot  perish.  .  .  .  From  Him,  there- 
fore, is  given  also  perseverance  in  good  even  to  the  end;  for 
it  is  not  given  except  to  those  who  will  not  perish,  since  they 
who  do  not  persevere  will  perish.^ 

Ch.  39(13).     I  speak  of  those  who  are  predestinated  to  the 

^  This  figure  of  the  two  cities  is  the  motif  of  the  whole  work,  in  which  the 
idea  is  developed  in  the  greatest  detail. 

^  See  Augustine's  treatise  On  the  Gift  of  Perseverance^  PNF,  ser.  I,  vol.  V. 


442  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

kingdom  of  God,  whose  number  is  so  certain  that  no  one  can 
either  be  added  to  them  or  taken  from  them;  not  of  those  who 
when  He  had  announced  and  spoken,  were  multipHed  beyond 
number  [Psalm  40  :  6].  For  these  may  be  said  to  be  called 
[vocati]  but  not  chosen  [elecH],  because  they  are  not  called 
according  to  purpose.^ 

(g)  Augustine,  Enchiridion,  100.     (MSL,  40  :  279.) 

Twofold  Predestination, 

Augustine  does  not  commonly  speak  of  predestination  of  the  wicked, 
i.  e.,  those  who  are  not  among  the  elect  and  consequently  predestinated 
to  grace  and  salvation.  As  a  rule  he  speaks  of  predestination  in  con- 
nection with  the  saints,  those  who  are  saved.  But  that  he,  with  per- 
fect consistency,  regarded  the  wicked  as  also  predestinated  is  shown  by 
the  following,  as  also  other  passages  in  his  works,  e.  g.,  City  of  God,  XV,  i 
(v.  supra),  XXII,  ch.  24  :  5.  This  point  has  a  bearing  in  connection 
with  the  controversy  on  predestination  in  the  ninth  century,  in  which 
Gottschalk  reasserted  the  theory  of  a  double  predestination. 

These  are  the  great  works  of  the  Lord,  sought  out  accord- 
ing to  all  His  good  pleasure  [Psalm  in  '.2],  and  wisely  sought 
out,  that  when  the  angehc  and  the  human  creature  sinned, 
that  is,  did  not  do  what  He  willed  but  what  the  creature  it- 
self willed,  so  by  the  will  of  the  creature,  by  which  was  done 
what  the  Creator  did  not  will,  He  carried  out  what  He  himself 
willed;  the  supremely  Good  thus  turning  to  account  even 
what  is  evil;  to  the  condemnation  of  those  whom  He  has 
justly  predestinated  to  punishment  and  to  the  salvation  of 
those  whom  He  has  mercifully  predestinated  to  grace. 

(h)    Augustine,  De  Civitate  Dei,  XVI,  2.     (MSL,  41  :  479.) 

Augustine's  theory  of  allegorical  interpretation. 

Augustine  had  been  repelled  by  the  literal  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  and  turned  to  the  Manichaeans  who  rejected  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Confessions,  III,  5.  From  Ambrose  he  learned  the  ''mystical" 
or  allegorical  method  of  interpreting  the  Old  Testament,  cf.  Confessions, 
VI,  4.  With  Augustine's  theory,  treated  at  length,  especially  in  his 
De  Doctrina  Christiana,  Bk.  3,  should  be  compared  Origen's  in  De  Prin- 
cipiis,  IV,  9-15.     See  above,  §  43,  B. 

^  This  distinction  is  of  importance  in  Augustine's  theory  of  the  Church. 


AUGUSTINE  443 

These  secrets  of  the  divine  Scriptures  we  investigate  as  we 
can;^  some  in  more,  some  in  less  agreement,  but  all  faithfully 
holding  it  as  certain  that  these  things  were  neither  done  nor 
recorded  without  some  foreshadowing  of  future  events,  and 
that  they  are  to  be  referred  only  to  Christ  and  His  Church, 
which  is  the  City  of  God,  the  proclamation  of  which  has  not 
ceased  since  the  beginning  of  the  human  race;  and  we  now 
see  it  everywhere  accomphshed.  From  the  blessing  of  the 
two  sons  of  Noah  and  from  the  cursing  of  the  middle  son, 
down  to  Abraham,  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  there  is 
no  mention  of  any  righteous  person  who  worshipped  God.  I 
would  not,  therefore,  believe  that  there  were  none,  but  to 
mention  every  one  would  have  been  very  long,  and  there 
would  have  been  historical  accuracy  rather  than  prophetic 
foresight.  The  writer  of  these  sacred  books,  or  rather  the 
Spirit  of  God  through  him,  sought  for  those  things  by  which 
not  only  the  past  might  be  narrated,  but  the  future  foretold, 
which  pertained  to  the  City  of  God;  for  whatever  is  said  of 
these  men  who  are  not  its  citizens  is  given  either  that  it  may 
profit  or  be  made  glorious  by  a  comparison  with  what  is  dif- 
ferent. Yet  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  all  that  is  recorded 
has  some  signification;  but  those  things  which  have  no  signi- 
fication of  their  own  are  interwoven  for  the  sake  of  the  things 
which  are  significant.  Only  by  the  ploughshare  is  the  earth 
cut  in  furrows;  but  that  this  may  be,  other  parts  of  the  plough 
are  necessary.  Only  the  strings  of  the  harp  and  other  musical 
instruments  are  fitted  to  give  forth  a  melody;  but  that  they 
may  do  so,  there  are  other  parts  of  the  instrument  which  are 
not,  indeed,  struck  by  those  who  sing,  but  with  them  are 
connected  the  strings  which  are  struck  and  produce  musical 
notes.  So  in  prophetic  history  some  things  are  narrated  which 
have  no  significance,  but  are,  as  it  were,  the  framework  to 
which  the  significant  things  are  attached. 

(i)  Augustine,  Enchiridion,  109,  no.     (MSL,  40  :  283.) 

^  He  has  been  explaining  the  significance  of  the  references  to  the  three  sons 
of  Noah. 


444  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Augustine  in  his  teaching  combined  a  number  of  different  theologi- 
cal tendencies,  without  working  them  into  a  consistent  system.  His 
doctrines  of  Original  Sin,  Predestination,  Grace  are  by  no  means  har- 
monized with  his  position  regarding  the  Church  and  the  sacraments 
in  which  he  builds  upon  the  foundation  laid  in  the  West,  especially  by 
Optatus.  See  below,  §  S^.  There  is  also  a  no  small  remnant  of  what 
might  be  called  pre-Augustinian  Western  piety,  which  comes  down 
from  Tertullian  and  of  which  the  following  is  an  illustration,  a 
passage  which  is  of  significance  in  the  development  of  the  doctrine 
of  purgatory.  Cf.  Tertullian,  De  Monogamia,  ch.  lo.  See  above, 
§39. 

§  109.  The  time,  moreover,  which  intervenes  between  a 
man's  death  and  the  final  resurrection,  keeps  the  soul  in  a 
hidden  retreat,  as  each  is  deserving  of  rest  or  afiSiction,  accord- 
ing to  what  its  lot  was  when  it  lived  in  the  flesh. 

§  no.  Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  the  souls  of  the  dead  are 
benefited  by  the  piety  of  their  living  friends,  when  the  sac- 
rifice of  the  Mediator  is  offered,  or  alms  given  in  the  Church 
in  their  behalf.  But  these  services  are  of  advantage  only  to 
those  who  during  their  lives  merited  that  services  of  this  kind 
could  help  them.  For  there  is  a  manner  of  life  which  is 
neither  so  good  as  not  to  require  these  services  after  death, 
nor  so  bad  that  these  services  are  of  no  avail  after  death. 
There  is,  on  the  other  hand,  a  kind  of  Kfe  so  good  as  not  to 
require  them;  and  again  one  so  bad  that  when  they  depart 
this  life  they  render  no  help.  Therefore  it  is  here  that  all 
the  merit  and  demerit  is  acquired,  by  which  one  can  either 
be  reheved  or  oppressed  after  death.  No  one,  then,  need 
hope  that  after  he  is  dead  he  shall  obtain  the  merit  with 
God  which  he  had  neglected  here.  And,  accordingly,  those 
services  which  the  Church  celebrates  for  the  commendation 
of  the  dead  are  not  opposed  to  the  Apostle's  words:  ''For 
we  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ,  that 
every  one  may  receive  the  things  done  in  his  body,  according 
to  that  he  hath  done,  whether  it  be  good  or  bad"  [Rom. 
14  :  10;  II  Cor.  5  :  10].  For  that  merit  that  renders  services 
profitable  to  a  man,  each  one  has  acquired  while  he  lives  in 
the  body.     For  it  is  not  to  every  one  that  these  services  are 


AUGUSTINE  AND  THE  DONATIST  SCHISM    445 

profitable.  And  why  are  they  not  profitable  to  all,  except 
it  be  because  of  the  different  kinds  of  hves  that  men  lead  in 
the  body?  When,  therefore,  sacrifices  either  of  the  altar  or  of 
alms  of  any  sort  are  offered  on  behalf  of  the  dead  who  have 
been  baptized,  they  are  thanksgivings  for  the  very  good;  they 
are  propitiations  [propitiationes]  for  the  not  very  bad;  and  for 
the  case  of  the  very  bad,  even  though  they  do  not  assist  the 
dead,  they  are  a  species  of  consolation  to  the  living.  And  to 
those  to  whom  they  are  profitable,  their  benefit  consists 
either  in  full  remission  of  sins,  or  at  least  in  making  the  con- 
demnation more  tolerable. 


§  83.    Augustine  and  the  Donatist  Schism 

After  the  recall  of  the  Donatists  by  the  Emperor  Julian, 
the  sect  rapidly  increased,  though  soon  numerous  divisions  ap- 
peared in  the  body.  The  more  liberal  opinions  of  the  Dona- 
tist grammarian  Tychonius  about  370  were  adopted  by  many 
of  the  less  fanatical.  The  connection  of  the  party  with  the 
Circumcellions  alienated  others.  The  contest  for  rigorism  led 
by  Maximianus  about  394  occasioned  a  schism  within  the 
Donatist  body. 

Augustine's  activity  in  the  Donatist  troubles  began  as  soon 
as  he  was  made  bishop  of  Hippo,  as  his  town  was  made  up 
largely  of  Donatists,  who  probably  constituted  more  than 
a  half  of  the  population.  The  books  written  by  him  after 
400  have  alone  survived. 

The  turning-point  in  the  history  of  Donatism  was  the 
Collatio,  or  conference,  held  at  Carthage  in  411.  Two  hun- 
dred and  seventy-nine  Donatist,  and  two  hundred  and  eighty- 
six  Catholic,  bishops  were  present.  Augustine  was  one  of 
those  who  represented  the  CathoKc  position.  The  victory 
was  adjudged  by  the  imperial  commissioners  to  the  Catholic 
party.  After  this  the  laws  against  the  sect  were  enforced 
relentlessly,  and  Donatism  rapidly  lost  its  importance.  The 
Vandal  invasion  in  429  changed  the  condition  of  things  for 


446  THE   CHURCH   TO   ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

a  time.     The  last  traces  of  Donatism  disappear  only  with  the 
Moslem  invasion  in  the  seventh  century. 

The  importance  of  the  Donatist  controversy  is  that  in  it 
were  defined  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  and  of  the  sacra- 
ments, definitions  which,  with  some  modifications,  controlled 
the  theology  of  the  Church  for  centuries. 

(a)  Optatus,  De  Schismate  Donatistarum,  II,  1-3.  (MSL, 
II  :94i.) 

The  unity  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

Ch.  I.  The  next  thing  to  do  ...  is  to  show  that  there  is  one 
Church  which  Christ  called  a  dove  and  a  bride.  Therefore 
the  Church  is  one,  the  sanctity  of  which  is  derived  from  the 
sacraments;  and  it  is  not  valued  according  to  the  pride  of 
persons.  Therefore  this  one  dove  Christ  also  calls  his  beloved 
bride.  This  cannot  be  among  heretics  and  schismatics.  .  .  . 
You  have  said,  brother  Parmenianus,  that  it  is  with  you  alone 
.  .  .  among  you  in  a  small  part  of  Africa,  in  the  corner  of  a 
small  region,  but  among  us  in  another  part  of  Africa  will  it 
not  be?  In  Spain,  in  Gaul,  in  Italy,  where  you  are  not,  will 
it  not  be?  .  .  .  And  through  so  many  innumerable  islands 
and  other  provinces,  which  can  scarcely  be  numbered,  will  it 
not  be?  Wherein  then  will  be  the  propriety  of  the  Catholic 
name,  since  it  is  called  Catholic,  because  it  is  reasonable^  and 
everywhere  diffused? 

Ch.  2.  I  have  proved  that  that  is  the  Cathohc  Church,  which 
spread  throughout  the  whole  world,  and  now  are  its  ornaments 
to  be  recalled;  and  it  is  to  be  seen  where  the  first  five  gifts 
[i.  e.,  notes  of  the  Church]  are,  which  you  say  are  six.  Among 
these  the  first  is  the  cathedra,  and  unless  a  bishop,  who  is  the 
angel  [the  second  gift  or  note  according  to  the  Donatists],  sit 
in  it,  no  other  gift  can  be  joined.  It  is  to  be  seen  who  first 
placed  a  see  and  where.  .  .  .  You  cannot  deny  that  in  the 

*  Dupin  in  his  edition  of  Optatus,  ad.  loc,  points  out  that  there  were  current 
two  etymologies  of  CathoHc;  according  to  one  xaTcz  Xoyov  it  meant  reasonable, 
and  according  to  the  other,  xaxa  oXov  general  or  universal. 


AUGUSTINE  AND   THE   DONATIST  SCHISM     447 

city  of  Rome  the  episcopal  cathedra  was  first  placed  by  Peter, 
and  in  it  sat  Peter,  the  head  of  all  the  Apostles,  wherefore  he 
is  called  Cephas,  so  that  in  that  one  cathedra  unity  is  pre- 
served by  all,  that  the  other  Apostles  might  not  claim  each 
one  for  himself  a  cathedra;  so  that  he  is  a  schismatic  and  a 
sinner  who  against  that  one  cathedra  sets  up  another. 

Ch.  3.  Therefore  Peter  first  sat  in  that  single  cathedra,  which 
is  the  first  gift  of  the  Church,  to  him  succeeded  Linus  .  .  . 
to  Damasus,  Siricius,  who  is  our  contemporary,  with  whom 
the  world  together  with  us  agree  in  one  fellowship  of  com- 
munion by  the  interchange  of  letters.  Recite  the  origin  of 
your  cathedra,  you  who  would  claim  for  yourself  the  Holy 
Church  [cf.  Tertullian,  De  Prcescriptione,  c.  32]. 

(b)  Optatus,  De  Schismate  Donatistarum,  V,  4.  (MSL, 
II  :  1051.) 

The  validity  of  sacraments  is  not  dependent  on  the  character  of 
those  who  minister  them.  With  this  should  be  compared  Augustine, 
Contra  litteras  Petiliani  Donatistce,  II,  38-91,  and  the  treatise  De  Bap- 
tismo  contra  Donatistas  lihri  sepfem,  which  is  little  more  than  a  work- 
ing out  in  a  thousand  variations  of  this  theme. 

In  celebrating  this  sacrament  of  baptism  there  are  three 
things  which  you  can  neither  increase,  diminish,  nor  omit. 
The  first  is  the  Trinity,  the  second  the  believer,  and  the  third 
the  minister.  .  .  .  The  first  two  remain  ever  immutable  and 
unmoved.  The  Trinity  is  always  the  same,  the  faith  in  each 
is  one.  But  the  person  of  him  who  ministers  is  clearly  not 
equal  to  the  first  two  points,  in  that  it  alone  is  mutable.  .  .  . 
For  it  is  not  one  man  who  always  and  everywhere  baptizes. 
In  this  work  there  were  formerly  others,  and  now  others 
still,  and  again  there  will  be  others;  those  who  minister  may 
be  changed,  the  sacraments  cannot  be  changed.  Since  there- 
fore you  see  that  they  who  baptize  are  ministers  and  are  not 
lords,  and  the  sacraments  are  holy  in  themselves,  not  on  ac- 
count of  men,  why  is  it  that  you  claim  so  much  for  yourselves? 
Why  is  it  that  you  endeavor  to  exclude  God  from  His  gifts? 
Permit  God  to  be  over  the  things  which  are  His.     For  that 


448  THE  CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

gift  cannot  be  performed  by  a  man  because  it  is  divine.  If 
you  think  it  can  be  so  bestowed,  you  render  void  the  words 
of  the  prophets  and  the  promises  of  God,  by  which  it  is  proved 
that  God  washes,  not  man. 

(c)  Augustine,  De  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  IV,  17 
(§24).     (MSL,  43  :  169.) 

Baptism  without  the  Church  vaHd  but  unprofitable. 

Augustine,  as  opposing  the  Donatists  and  agreeing  with  the  Catholic 
Church,  asserted  the  validity  of  baptism  when  conferred  by  one  out- 
side the  communion  of  the  Church.  It  was  notorious  that  Cyprian 
and  the  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  258  [see  ANF,  vol.  V.,  pp.  565  /.; 
cf.  Hefele,  §  6],  had  held  an  opposite  opinion.  As  Cyprian  was  the 
great  teacher  of  North  Africa,  and  in  the  highest  place  in  the  esteem 
of  all,  Augustine  was  forced  to  make  "distinctions."  This  he  did  in 
his  theory  as  to  the  validity  of  baptism  as  in  the  following  passage. 
The  Sixth  Book  of  the  same  treatise  is  composed  of  a  statement  of  the 
bishops  at  the  Council  of  Carthage,  and  Augustine's  answer  to  each 
statement. 

*Xan  the  power  of  baptism,"  says  Cyprian,  ''be  greater 
than  confession,  than  martyrdom,  that  a  man  should  confess 
Christ  before  men,  and  be  baptized  in  his  own  blood,  and  yet," 
he  says,  "neither  does  this  baptism  profit  the  heretic,  even 
though  for  confessing  Christ  he  be  put  to  death  outside  the 
Church."  This  is  most  true;  for  by  being  put  to  death  out- 
side the  Church,  he  is  proved  not  to  have  had  that  charity  of 
which  the  Apostle  says:  ''Though  I  give  my  body  to  be  burned 
and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me  nothing"  [I  Cor.  13  :  3]. 
But  if  martyrdom  is  of  no  avail  for  the  reason  that  charity 
is  lacking,  neither  does  it  profit  those  who,  as  Paul  says,  and 
Cyprian  further  sets  forth,  are  living  within  the  Church  with- 
out charity,  in  envy  and  malice;  and  yet  they  can  both  re- 
ceive and  transmit  true  baptism.  "Salvation,"  he  says,  "is 
not  without  the  Church."  Who  denies  this?  And  there- 
fore whatever  men  have  that  belongs  to  the  Church,  outside 
the  Church  it  profits  them  nothing  toward  salvation.  But 
it  is  one  thing  not  to  have,  another  to  have  it  but  to  no  use. 
He  who  has  it  not  must  be  baptized  that  he  may  have  it;  he 


AUGUSTINE  AND  THE  DONATIST  SCHISM    449 

who  has  to  no  use  must  be  corrected,  that  what  he  has  he  may 
have  to  some  use.  Nor  is  the  water  in  baptism  ''adulterous," 
because  neither  is  the  creature  itself,  which  God  made,  evil, 
nor  is  the  fault  to  be  found  in  the  words  of  the  Gospel  in  the 
mouths  of  any  who  are  astray;  but  the  fault  is  theirs  in  whom 
there  is  an  adulterous  spirit,  even  though  it  may  receive  the 
adornment  of  the  sacrament  from  a  lawful  spouse.  It  there- 
fore can  be  true  that  baptism  is  "common  to  us  and  to  the 
heretics,"  since  the  Gospel  can  be  common  to  us,  although 
their  error  differs  from  our  faith;  whether  they  think  other- 
wise than  the  truth  about  the  Father  or  Son  or  the  Holy 
Spirit;  or,  being  cut  away  from  unity,  do  not  gather  with 
Christ,  but  scatter  abroad,  because  it  is  possible  that  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism  can  be  common  to  us  if  we  are  the  wheat  of 
the  Lord  with  the  covetous  within  the  Church  and  with  rob- 
bers and  drunkards  and  other  pestilent  persons,  of  whom  it  is 
said,  ''They  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,"  and  yet 
the  vices  by  which  they  are  separated  from  the  kingdom  of 
God  are  not  shared  by  us. 

(d)  Augustine,  Ep.  98,  ad  Bonifatium.     (MSL,  33  :  363.) 

Relation  of  the  sacrament  to  that  of  which  it  is  the  sign.  Sacraments 
are  effective  if  no  hinderance  is  placed  to  their  working. 

On  Easter  Sunday  we  say,  "This  day  the  Lord  rose  from 
the  dead,"  although  so  many  years  have  passed  since  His 
resurrection.  .  .  .  The  event  itself  being  said  to  take  place 
on  that  day,  because,  although  it  really  took  place  long  before, 
it  is  on  that  day  sacramentally  celebrated.  Was  not  Christ 
once  for  all  offered  up  in  His  own  person  as  a  sacrifice?  And 
yet,  is  He  not  Hkewise  offered  up  in  the  sacrament  as  a  sac- 
rifice, not  only  in  the  special  solemnities  of  Easter,  but  also 
daily  among  our  congregations;  so  that  when  a  man  is  ques- 
tioned and  answers  that  He  is  offered  as  a  sacrifice  in  that 
ordinance,  does  he  not  declare  what  is  strictly  true?  For  if 
sacraments  had  not  some  points  of  real  resemblance  to  the 
things  of  which  they  are  the  sacraments,  they  would  not  be 


450  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

sacraments  at  all.  [Augustine's  general  definition  of  a  sac- 
rament is  that  it  is  a  sign  of  a  sacred  thing.]  In  most  cases, 
moreover,  they  do,  in  virtue  of  this  likeness,  bear  the  names 
of  the  realities  which  they  resemble.  As  therefore  in  a  cer- 
tain manner  the  sacrament  of  the  body  of  Christ  is  the  body 
of  Christ,  the  sacrament  of  the  blood  of  Christ  is  the  blood  of 
Christ,  so  the  sacrament  of  faith  is  faith.  .  .  .  Now,  believing 
is  nothing  else  than  having  faith;  and  accordingly,  when  on 
behalf  of  an  infant  as  yet  incapable  of  exercising  faith,  the 
answer  is  given  that  he  believes,  this  answer  means  that  he 
has  faith  because  of  the  sacrament  of  faith,  and  in  like  manner 
the  answer  is  made  that  he  turns  himself  toward  God  because 
of  the  sacrament  of  conversion,  since  the  answer  itself  belongs 
to  the  celebration  of  the  sacrament.  Thus  the  Apostle  says, 
in  regard  to  this  sacrament  of  baptism:  ^'We  are  buried  with 
Christ  by  baptism  into  death."  He  does  not  say,  ''We  have 
signified  our  being  buried  with  Him,"  but:  "We  have  been 
buried  with  Him."  He  has  therefore  given  to  the  sacrament 
pertaining  to  so  great  a  transaction  no  other  name  than  the 
word  describing  the  transaction  itself. 

lo.  Therefore  an  infant,  although  he  is  not  yet  a  believer 
in  the  sense  of  having  that  faith  which  includes  the  consenting 
will  of  those  who  exercise  it,  nevertheless  becomes  a  beHever 
through  the  sacrament  of  that  faith.  .  .  .  The  infant,  though 
not  yet  possessing  a  faith  helped  by  the  understanding,  is  not 
obstructing^  faith  by  an  antagonism  of  the  understanding, 
and  therefore  receives  with  profit  the  sacrament  of  faith. 

(e)  Augustine,  DeCorrectione  Donatistarum,^^  22  ff.  (MSL, 
33  •  8o2.) 

The  argument  in  favor  of  using  force  to  compel  the  Donatists  to 
return  to  the  Church. 

^  The  expression  opponcre  ohiccm  became  in  scholastic  theology  of  great  im- 
portance in  connection  with  the  ex  opcre  opcrato  nature  of  the  sacraments  of 
the  New  Law.  On  this  whole  matter  of  the  sacraments  in  the  Fathers,  see 
Schwanne,  Dogmengeschichte,  §  93,  which  is  very  clear  and  helpful,  especially 
as  showing  the  basis  of  scholastic  theory  of  the  sacraments  in  the  patristic 
period,  and  that,  too,  without  doing  violence  to  his  authorities. 


AUGUSTINE  AND   THE  DONATIST  SCHISM    451 

The  indelible  character  of  sacraments,  i.  e.,  baptism.  For  other 
references,  see  Mirbt,  n.  137. 

Augustine  in  the  early  part  of  the  Donatist  controversy  was  not  in 
favor  of  using  force.  Like  the  others,  e.  g.,  Optatus,  he  denied  that 
force  had  been  employed  by  the  Church.  About  404  the  situation 
changed,  and  his  opinion  did  likewise.  This  work,  known  also  as  Epistle 
CLXXXV,  was  written  circa  417.  Compare  Augustine's  position 
with  the  statement  of  Jerome,  "Piety  for  God  is  not  cruelty,"  cf. 
Hagenbach,  History  of  Christian  Doctrines,  §  135  :  7.  The  Donatists 
had  much  injured  their  position  by  their  treatment  of  a  party  which 
had  produced  a  schism  in  their  own  body,  the  Maximianists. 

§  22.  Who  can  love  us  more  than  Christ  who  laid  down 
His  life  for  the  sheep?  And  yet,  after  calling  Peter  and  the 
other  Apostles  by  His  word  alone,  in  the  case  of  Paul,  formerly 
Saul,  the  great  builder  of  His  Church,  but  previously  its 
cruel  persecutor.  He  not  only  constrained  him  with  His  voice, 
but  even  dashed  him  to  the  earth  with  His  power.  .  .  .  Where 
is  what  they  [the  Donatists]  are  accustomed  to  cry:  ''To  be- 
lieve or  not  to  believe  is  a  matter  that  is  free"?  Toward 
whom  did  Christ  use  violence?  Whom  did  He  compel?  Here 
they  have  the  Apostle  Paul.  Let  them  recognize  in  his  case 
Christ's  first  compeUing  and  afterward  teaching;  first  strik- 
ing and  afterward  consoling.  For  it  is  wonderful  how  he 
who  had  been  compelled  by  bodily  punishment  entered  into 
the  Gospel  and  afterward  labored  more  in  the  Gospel  than  all 
they  who  were  called  by  word  only;  and  the  greater  fear  com- 
pelled him  toward  love,  that  perfect  love  which  casts  out  fear. 

§  23.  Why,  therefore,  should  not  the  Church  compel  her 
lost  sons  to  return  if  the  lost  sons  compelled  others  to  perish? 
Although  even  men  whom  they  have  not  compelled  but  only 
led  astray,  their  loving  mother  embraces  with  more  affection 
if  they  are  recalled  to  her  bosom  through  the  enforcement 
of  terrible  but  salutary  laws,  and  are  the  objects  of  far  more 
deep  congratulation  than  those  whom  she  has  never  lost. 
Is  it  not  a  part  of  the  care  of  the  shepherd,  when  any  sheep 
have  left  the  flock,  even  though  not  violently  forced  away, 
but  led  astray  by  soft  words  and  by  coaxings,  and  they  have 
begun  to  be  possessed  by  strangers,  to  bring  them  back  to  the 


452  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

fold  of  his  master  when  he  has  found  them,  by  the  terrors  or 
even  the  pains  of  the  whip,  if  they  wish  to  resist;  especially 
since,  if  they  multiply  abundantly  among  the  fugitive  slaves 
and  robbers,  he  has  the  more  right  in  that  the  mark  of  the 
master  is  recognized  on  them,  which  is  not  outraged  in  those 
whom  we  receive  but  do  not  baptize?^  So  indeed  is  the  error 
of  the  sheep  to  be  corrected  that  the  sign  of  the  Redeemer 
shall  not  be  marred.  For  if  any  one  is  marked  with  the  royal 
stamp  by  a  deserter,  who  has  himself  been  marked  with  it,  and 
they  receive  forgiveness,  and  the  one  returns  to  his  service, 
and  the  other  begins  to  be  in  the  service  in  which  he  had  not 
yet  been,  that  mark  is  not  effaced  in  either  of  them,  but  rather 
it  is  recognized  in  both,  and  approved  with  due  honor  because 
it  is  the  king's.  Since  they  cannot  show  that  that  is  bad  to 
which  they  are  compelled,^  they  maintained  that  they  ought 
not  to  be  compelled  to  the  good.  But  we  have  shown  that 
Paul  was  compelled  by  Christ;  therefore  the  Church  in  com- 
pelling the  Donatists  is  following  the  example  of  her  Lord, 
though  in  the  first  instance  she  waited  in  hopes  of  not  having 
to  compel  any,  that  the  prediction  might  be  fulfilled  con- 
cerning the  faith  of  kings  and  peoples. 

§  24.  For  in  this  sense  also  we  may  interpret  without 
absurdity  the  apostoHc  declaration  when  the  blessed  Apostle 
Paul  says:  ''Being  ready  to  revenge  all  disobedience,  when 
your  obedience  is  fulfilled"  [H  Cor.  10:6].  Whence  also 
the  Lord  himself  bids  the  guests  to  be  brought  first  to  His 
great  supper,  and  afterward  compelled ;  for  when  His  servants 
answered  Him,  ''Lord,  it  is  done  as  thou  hast  commanded, 
and  yet  there  is  room,"  He  said  to  them:  "Go  out  into  the 
highways  and  hedges  and  compel  them  to  come  in"  [Luke 
14  :  22,  23].     In  those,  therefore,  who  were  first  brought  in 

^  The  basis  of  the  doctrine  of  the  indelible  character  of  baptism.  Cf.  Augus- 
tine, Contra  epist.  Farm.,  II,  13,  28.  "  Each  [baptism  and  the  right  of 
giving  baptism]  is  indeed  a  sacrament,  and  by  a  certain  consecration  each  is 
given  to  a  man,  this  when  he  is  baptized,  that  when  he  is  ordained;  therefore 
in  the  Catholic  Church  it  is  not  lawful  to  repeat  either. "     Cf.  next  passage. 

2  This  was  written  after  the  conference  with  the  Donatists  in  411,  in  which 
victory  was  adjudged  to  the  Catholics. 


AUGUSTINE  AND  THE  DONATIST  SCHISM    453 

with  gentleness  the  former  obedience  is  fulfilled,  but  in  those 
who  were  compelled  the  disobedience  is  avenged.  For  what 
else  is  the  meaning  of  '' Compel  them  to  come  in,"  after  it 
had  previously  been  said,  "Bring  in,"  and  the  answer  was: 
"Lord,  it  is  done  as  Thou  commandest,  and  yet  there  is 
room"?  Wherefore  if  by  the  power  which  the  Church  has 
received  by  divine  appointment  in  its  due  season,  through 
the  rehgious  character  and  faith  of  kings,  those  who  are  found 
in  the  highways  and  hedges — that  is,  in  heresies  and  schisms — 
are  compelled  to  come  in,  then  let  them  not  find  fault  because 
they  are  compelled,  but  consider  to  what  they  are  so  compelled. 
The  supper  of  the  Lord,  the  unity,  is  of  the  body  of  Christ, 
not  only  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  but  also  in  the  bond  of 
peace. 

(/)  Augustine,  Contra  epistulam  Parmeniani,  II,  13  (29). 

(MSL,  43:71-) 

Indelibility  of  baptism. 

Parmenianus  was  the  Donatist  bishop  who  succeeded  Donatus  in 
the  see  of  Carthage.  The  letter  here  answered  was  written  to  Ty- 
chonius,  a  leading  Donatist.  In  it  Parmenianus  calls  the  Church 
defiled  because  it  contained  unworthy  members.  The  answer  of  Au- 
gustine was  written  in  400,  many  years  later. 

If  any  one,  either  a  deserter  or  one  who  has  never  served  as 
a  soldier,  signs  any  private  person  with  the  military  mark, 
would  not  he  who  has  signed  be  punished  as  a  deserter,  when 
he  has  been  arrested,  and  so  much  the  more  severely  as  it 
could  be  proved  that  he  had  never  at  all  served  as  a  soldier, 
and  at  the  same  time  along  with  him  would  not  the  most 
impudent  giver  of  the  sign,  be  punished  if  he  have  surrendered 
him?  Or  perchance  he  takes  no  mihtary  service,  but  is  afraid 
of  the  military  mark  [character]  in  his  body,  and  he  betakes 
himself  to  the  clemency  of  the  Emperor,  and  when  he  has 
poured  forth  prayers  and  obtained  forgiveness,  he  then  begins 
to  undertake  mihtary  service,  when  the  man  has  been  lib- 
erated and  corrected  is  that  mark  [character]  ever  repeated, 
and  not  rather  is  he  not  recognized  and  approved?    Would 


454  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

the  Christian  sacraments  by  chance  be  less  enduring  than  this 
bodily  mark,  since  we  see  that  apostates  do  not  lack  baptism, 
and  to  them  it  is  never  given  again  when  they  return  by 
means  of  penitence,  and  therefore  it  is  judged  not  possible  to 
lose  it. 

(g)  Augustine,  Contra  epistulam  Manichcei,  ch.  4  (5).  (MSL, 
42  :  175.)     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  132. 

Authority  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

This  work,  written  in  396  or  397,  is  important  in  this  connection  as 
showing  the  place  the  CathoHc  Church  took  in  the  mind  of  Augustine 
as  an  authority  and  the  nature  of  that  authority. 

Not  to  speak  of  that  wisdom  which  you  [the  Manichaeans] 
do  not  believe  to  be  in  the  Catholic  Church,  there  are  many 
other  things  which  most  justly  keep  me  in  her  bosom.  The 
consent  of  people  and  nations  keeps  me  in  the  Church;  so 
does  her  authority,  inaugurated  by  miracles,  nourished  by 
hope,  enlarged  by  love,  established  by  age.  The  succession 
of  priests  keeps  me,  beginning  from  the  very  seat  of  Peter 
the  Apostle,  to  whom  the  Lord  after  His  resurrection  gave  it 
in  charge  to  feed  His  sheep  down  to  the  present  episcopate. 
And  so  lastly  does  the  name  itself  of  Catholic,  which  not 
without  reason,  amid  so  many  heresies,  that  Church  alone 
has  so  retained  that,  though  all  heretics  wish  to  be  called 
Catholics,  yet  when  a  stranger  asks  where  the  Cathohc 
Church  meets  no  heretic  will  venture  to  point  to  his  own 
basilica  or  house.  Since  then  so  many  and  so  great  are  the 
very  precious  ties  belonging  to  the  Christian  name  which 
rightly  keep  a  man  who  is  a  believer  in  the  Catholic  Church 
...  no  one  shall  move  me  from  the  faith  which  binds  my 
mind  with  ties  so  many  and  so  strong  to  the  Christian  rehg- 
ion. 

Let  us  see  what  Manichgeus  teaches  us;  and  in  particular 
let  us  examine  that  treatise  which  you  call  the  Fundamental 
Epistle  in  which  almost  all  that  you  believe  is  contained.  For 
in  that  unhappy  time  when  we  read  it,  we  were  called  by  you 


THE  PELAGIAN   CONTROVERSY  455 

enlightened.  The  epistle  begins:  ''Manichaeus,  an  apostle  of 
Jesus  Christ,  by  the  providence  of  God  the  Father.  These 
are  wholesome  words  from  the  perennial  and  living  foun- 
tain." Now,  if  you  please,  patiently  give  heed  to  my  in- 
quiry. I  do  not  believe  that  he  is  an  apostle  of  Christ.  Do 
not,  I  beg  of  you,  be  enraged  and  begin  to  curse.  You  know 
that  it  is  my  rule  not  to  believe  without  consideration  any- 
thing offered  by  you.  "Wherefore  I  ask,  who  is  this  Mani- 
chaeus?"  You  reply,  "An  apostle  of  Christ."  I  do  not  be- 
lieve it.  Now  you  are  at  a  loss  what  to  say  or  do;  for  you 
promised  to  give  me  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  you  force 
me  to  believe  something  I  do  not  know.  Perhaps  you  will 
read  the  Gospel  to  me,  and  from  it  you  will  attempt  to 
defend  the  person  of  Manichaeus.  But  should  you  meet 
with  a  person  not  yet  beheving  the  Gospel,  what  could  you 
reply  to  him  if  he  said  to  you:  ''I  do  not  believe"?  For 
my  part  I  should  not  believe  the  Gospel  except  the  authority 
of  the  Catholic  Church  moved  me.  So  then  I  have  assented 
to  them  when  they  say  to  me,  "Beheve  the  Gospel";  why 
should  I  not  assent  to  them  saying  to  me:  "Do  not  believe 
the  Manichaeans  "  ? 


§  84.    The  Pelagian  Controversy 

The  Pelagian  controversy,  in  which  the  characteristic  teach- 
ing of  Augustine  found  its  best  expression,  may  be  divided 
into  three  periods.  In  the  first  period,  beginning  about  411, 
Pelagius  and  Caslestius,  who  had  been  teaching  at  Rome 
unmolested  since  400  and  had  come  to  Carthage,  probably 
on  account  of  the  barbarian  attack  upon  Rome,  are  opposed 
at  Carthage,  and  six  propositions  attributed  to  Caelestius  are 
condemned  at  a  council  there,  where  he  attempted  to  be 
ordained.  Caelestius  leaves  for  the  East  and  is  ordained  at 
Ephesus,  412,  and  Pelagius  soon  after  follows  him.  In  the 
second  period,  415-417,  the  controversy  is  in  the  East  as  well 
as  in  the  West,  as  Augustine  by  letters  to  Jerome  gave  warn- 


456  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

ing  about  Pelagius,  and  councils  are  held  at  Jerusalem  and 
Diospolis,  where  Pelagius  is  acquitted  of  heresy.  This  was 
probably  due  as  much  to  the  general  sympathy  of  the  Eastern 
theologians  with  his  doctrine  as  to  any  alleged  misrepresenta- 
tion by  Pelagius.  But  in  North  Africa  synods  are  also  held 
condemning  Pelagius,  and  their  findings  are  approved  by 
Innocent  of  Rome.  But  Pelagius  and  Caelestius  send  con- 
fessions of  faith  to  Zosimus  (417-418),  Innocent's  successor, 
who  reproves  the  Africans  and  acquits  Pelagius  and  Caelestius 
as  entirely  sound.  In  the  third  period,  417-431,  the  attack 
on  Pelagius  is  taken  up  at  Rome  itself  by  some  of  the  clergy, 
and  an  imperial  edict  is  obtained  against  the  Pelagians. 
Zosimus  changes  his  opinion  and  approves  the  findings  of  a 
general  council  called  at  Carthage  in  418,  in  which  the  doc- 
trines of  original  sin  and  the  need  of  grace  are  asserted.  The 
last  act  of  the  controversy  in  its  earlier  form,  after  the  depo- 
sition of  the  leading  Pelagians,  among  them  JuHan,  of 
Eclanum,  their  theologian,  is  the  condemnation  of  Pelagius  at 
the  Council  of  Ephesus,  in  431.     V.  infra,  §  89. 

Additional  source  material:  See  A.  Bruckner,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte 
des  pelagianischen  Streites  (in  Latin),  in  Kriiger's  Quellenschriften, 
Freiburg-im-Breisgau,  1906.  The  principal  works  of  Augustine  bear- 
ing on  the  Pelagian  controversy  may  be  found  in  PNF.  ser.  I,  vol.  V. 

(a)  Augustine,  Ep.  146,  ad  Pelagium.     (MSL,  33  :  596.) 

This  was  probably  written  before  the  controversy.  As  to  its  use 
later,  see  Augustine,  De  gestis  Pelagii,  chs.  51  (26)/.  (PNF). 

I  thank  you  very  much  that  you  have  been  so  kind  as  to 
make  me  glad  by  your  letter  informing  me  of  your  welfare. 
May  the  Lord  recompense  you  with  those  blessings  that  you 
forever  be  good  and  may  live  eternally  with  Him  who  is  eter- 
nal, my  lord  greatly  beloved  and  brother  greatly  longed  for. 
Although  I  do  not  acknowledge  that  anything  in  me  deserves 
the  eulogies  which  the  letter  of  your  benevolence  contains 
about  me,  I  cannot,  however,  be  ungrateful  for  the  good-will 
therein  manifested  toward  one  so  insignificant,  while  suggest- 


THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  457 

ing  at  the  same  time  that  you  should  rather  pray  for  me  that 
I  may  be  made  by  the  Lord  such  as  you  suppose  me  already 
to  be. 

(b)  Augustine.  De  Peccatorum  Mentis  et  Remissione  et  de 
Baptismo  Parvulorum.     (MSL,  44  :  185,  188.) 

Augustine's  testimony  as  to  the  character  of  Pelagius. 

This  work  was  written  in  412,  after  the  condemnation  of  Caelestius 
at  Carthage.  It  was  the  first  in  the  series  of  polemical  writings  against 
the  teaching  of  Pelagius.  The  first  book  is  especially  important  as  a 
statement  of  Augustine's  position  as  to  the  nature  of  justifying  grace. 

It  should  be  recalled  that  Pelagius  was  a  monk  of  exemplary  Hfe,  and 
a  zealous  preacher  of  morality.  It  may  be  said  that  in  him  the  older 
moralistic  tendency  in  theology  was  embodied  in  opposition  to  the  new 
rehgious  spirit  of  Augustine.     Cf.  Bruckner,  op.  cit.y  n.  4. 

III.  I.  However,  within  the  last  few  days  I  have  read 
some  writings  of  Pelagius,  a  holy  man,  as  I  hear,  who  has  made 
no  small  progress  in  the  Christian  Hfe,  and  these  writings  con- 
tain very  brief  expositions  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul  the  Apostle.^ 

III.  3.  But  we  must  not  omit  that  this  good  and  praise- 
worthy man  (as  they  who  know  him  describe  him  as  being) 
has  not  advanced  this  argument  against  the  .natural  transmis- 
sion of  sin  in  his  own  person. 

(c)  Pelagius,  Fragments,  in  Augustine's  De  Gratia  Christi 
et  de  Peccato  Originali.     (MSL,  44  :  364,  379.) 

The  teaching  of  Pelagius  can  be  studied  not  only  in  his  opponent's 
statements  but  in  his  own  words.  These  are  to  be  found  in  his  com- 
mentary (see  note  to  previous  selection),  and  also  in  fragments  found  in 
Augustine's  writings  and  several  minor  pieces  (see  below). 

I.  7.  Very  ignorant  persons  think  that  we  do  wrong  in 
this  matter  to  divine  grace,  because  we  say  that  it  by  no 
means  perfects  sanctity  in  us  without  our  will :  as  if  God  could 
impose  any  commands  upon  His  grace  and  would  not  supply 
also  the  help  of  His  grace  to  those  to  whom  He  has  given  com- 
mands, so  that  men  might  more  easily  accomplish  through 
grace  what  they  are  required  to  do  by  their  free  will.     And 

^  These  commentaries  were  falsely  published  under  the  name  of  Jerome  and 
may  be  found  in  his  works.     (MSL,  30  :  670.) 


458  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

this  grace  we  do  not  for  our  part,  as  you  suppose,  allow  to 
consist  merely  in  the  law,  but  also  in  the  help  of  God.  God 
helps  us  by  His  teaching  and  revelation  when  He  opens  the 
eyes  of  our  heart;  when  He  points  out  to  us  the  future,  that 
we  may  not  be  absorbed  in  the  present;  when  He  discovers  to 
us  the  snares  of  the  devil ;  when  He  enlightens  us  with  manifold 
and  ineffable  gifts  of  heavenly  grace.  Does  the  man  who  says 
this  appear  to  you  to  be  a  denier  of  grace?  Does  he  not 
acknowledge  both  man's  free  will  and  God's  grace? 

T  39- 

Speaking  of  the  text  Rom.  7  :  23:  "But  I  see  another  law  in  my 
members,  warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bringing  me  into 
captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  members." 

Now  what  you  [i.  e.,  Augustine,  whom  he  is  addressing]  wish 
us  to  understand  of  the  Apostle  himself,  all  Church  writers 
assert  that  he  spoke  in  the  person  of  the  sinner,  and  of  one 
still  under  the  law,  who  by  reason  of  very  long  custom  of  vice 
was  held  bound,  as  it  were,  by  a  certain  necessity  of  sinning, 
and  who,  although  he  desired  good  with  his  will  in  practice, 
indeed,  was  driven  into  evil.  In  the  person,  however,  of  one 
man  the  Apostle  designates  the  people  who  sinned  still  under 
the  ancient  law,  and  this  people,  he  declares,  are  to  be  de- 
livered from  this  evil  of  custom  through  Christ,  who  first  of 
all  remits  all  sins  in  baptism,  to  those  who  beheve  on  Him, 
and  then  by  an  imitation  of  Himself  incites  them  to  perfect 
holiness,  and  by  the  example  of  virtues  overcomes  the  evil 
custom  of  sins. 

(d)  Velsigms,  Epistula  ad  Demetriadem.    (MSL,  33  :  iioo^.) 

This  epistle,  from  which  selections  are  given,  was  written  probably 
about  412  or  413.  As  it  gives  a  statement  of  the  teaching  of  Pelagius 
in  his  own  words,  it  is  of  especial  historical  interest.  Demetrias  was 
a  virgin,  and  probably  under  the  spiritual  direction  of  Pelagius,  though 
little  is  known  of  her.     Text  in  Bruckner,  op.  cit.,  n.  56. 

Ch.  2.  As  often  as  I  have  to  speak  of  the  principles  of 
virtue  and  a  holy  life,  I  am  accustomed  first  of  all  to  call  at- 


THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  459 

tention  to  the  capacity  and  character  of  human  nature,  and 
to  show  what  it  is  able  to  accomplish;  then  from  this  to 
arouse  the  feelings  of  the  hearer,  that  he  may  strive  after  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  virtue,  that  he  may  permit  himself  to  be 
roused  to  acts  which  perhaps  he  had  regarded  as  impossible. 
For  we  are  quite  unable  to  travel  the  way  of  virtue  if  hope 
does  not  accompany  us.  For  all  attempts  to  accomplish 
anything  cease  if  one  is  in  doubt  whether  he  will  attain  the 
goal.  This  order  of  exhortation  I  follow  in  other  minor  writ- 
ings and  in  this  case  also.  I  believe  it  must  be  kept  especially 
in  mind  where  the  good  of  nature  needs  to  be  set  forth  the 
more  in  detail  as  the  Hfe  is  to  be  more  perfectly  formed,  that 
the  spirit  may  not  be  more  neglectful  and  slow  in  its  striving 
after  virtue,  as  it  believes  itself  to  have  the  less  abihty,  and 
when  it  is  ignorant  of  what  is  within  it,  think  that  it  does  not 
possess  it. 

Ch.  3.  One  must  be  careful  to  see  to  it  that  .  .  .  one  does 
not  think  that  a  man  is  not  made  good  because  he  can  do  evil 
and  is  not  compelled  to  an  immutable  necessity  of  doing  good 
through  the  might  of  nature.  For  if  you  dihgently  consider  it 
and  turn  your  mind  to  the  subtler  understanding  of  the 
matter,  the  better  and  superior  position  of  man  will  appear 
in  that  from  which  his  inferior  condition  was  inferred.  But 
just  in  this  freedom  in  either  direction,  in  this  liberty  toward 
either  side,  is  placed  the  glory  of  our  rational  nature.  Therein, 
I  say,  consists  the  entire  honor  of  our  nature,  therein  its 
dignity;  from  this  the  very  good  merit  praise,  from  this  their 
reward.  For  there  would  be  for  those  who  always  remain 
good  no  virtue  if  they  had  not  been  able  to  have  chosen  the 
evil.  For  since  God  wished  to  present  to  the  rational  creature 
the  gift  of  voluntary  goodness  and  the  power  of  the  free  will, 
by  planting  in  man  the  possibiHty  of  turning  himself  toward 
either  side.  He  made  His  special  gift  the  ability  to  be  what  he 
would  be  in  order  that  he,  being  capable  of  good  and  evil, 
could  do  either  and  could  turn  his  will  to  either  of  them. 

Ch.  8.     We  defend  the  advantage  of  nature  not  in  the  sense 


46o  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

that  we  say  it  cannot  do  evil,  since  we  declare  that  it  is  ca- 
pable of  good  and  evil;  we  only  protect  it  from  reproach.  It 
should  not  appear  as  if  we  were  driven  to  evil  by  a  disease  of 
nature,  we  who  do  neither  good  nor  bad  without  our  will, 
and  to  whom  there  is  always  freedom  to  do  one  of  two  things, 
since  always  we  are  able  to  do  both.  .  .  .  Nothing  else  makes 
it  difhcult  for  us  to  do  good  than  long  custom  of  sinning  which 
has  infected  us  since  we  were  children,  and  has  gradually 
corrupted  us  for  many  years,  so  that  afterward  it  holds  us 
bound  to  it  and  delivered  over  to  it,  so  that  it  almost  seems 
as  if  it  had  the  same  force  as  nature. 

If  before  the  Law,  as  we  are  told,  and  long  before  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  Redeemer,  various  persons  can  be  named  who 
lived  just  and  holy  lives,  how  much  more  after  His  appear- 
ance must  we  believe  that  we  are  able  to  do  the  same,  we  who 
have  been  taught  through  Christ's  grace,  and  born  again  to  be 
better  men;  and  we  who  by  His  blood  have  been  reconciled 
and  purified,  and  by  His  example  incited  to  more  perfect 
righteousness,  ought  to  be  better  than  they  who  were  before 
the  Law,  better  than  they  who  were  under  the  law. 

{e)  Marius  Mercator,  Commonitorium  super  nomine  Cce- 
lestii,  ch.  i.     (MSL,  48  :  67.)     Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  737^. 

The  Council  of  Carthage  and  the  opinions  of  Caelestius  condemned 
at  that  council,  411. 

Marius  Mercator,  a  friend  and  supporter  of  Augustine,  was  one  of 
the  most  determined  opponents  of  Pelagianism,  as  also  of  Nestorianism. 
His  dates  are  not  well  determined.  In  418  he  sent  works  to  Augustine 
to  be  examined  by  the  latter,  and  he  seems  to  have  lived  until  after 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  451.  The  work  from  which  the  selection  is 
taken  was  written,  429,  in  Greek,  and  translated  and  republished  in 
Latin,  431  or  432.  With  the  following  should  be  compared  Augustine's 
De  Gratia  Christi  et  Peccato  Originali,  II,  2/.,  and  Ep.  i75:6;i57:3, 
22. 

A  certain  Caelestius,  a  eunuch  from  his  mother's  womb,  a 
disciple  and  auditor  of  Pelagius,  left  Rome  about  twenty  years 
ago  and  came  to  Carthage,  the  metropolis  of  all  Africa,  and 
there  he  was  accused  of  the  following  heads  before  Aurelius, 


THE  PELAGIAN   CONTROVERSY  461 

bishop  of  that  city,  by  a  complaint  from  a  certain  PauHnus,  a 
deacon  of  Bishop  Ambrose  of  Milan,  of  sacred  memory,  as 
the  record  of  the  acts  stands  in  which  the  same  complaint  is 
inserted  (a  copy  of  the  acts  of  the  council  we  have  in  our 
hands)  that  he  not  only  taught  this  himself,  but  also  sent  in 
different  directions  throughout  the  provinces  those  who 
agreed  with  him  to  disseminate  among  the  people  these 
things,  that  is: 

1.  Adam  was  made  mortal  and  would  have  died  whether 
he  had  sinned  or  had  not  sinned. 

2.  The  sin  of  Adam  injured  himself  alone,  and  not  the 
human  race. 

3.  New-born  children  are  in  that  state  in  which  Adam  was 
before  his  fall. 

4.  Neither  by  the  death  and  sin  of  Adam  does  the  whole 
race  die,  nor  by  the  resurrection  of  Christ  does  the  whole  race 
rise. 

5.  The  Law  leads  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  as  well  as  the 
Gospel. 

6.  Even  before  the  coming  of  the  Lord  there  were  men 
without  sin. 

(J)  Pelagius,  Confessio  fidei.  (MSL,  45  :  1716  /.)  Hahn, 
§  209. 

The  confession  of  faith  addressed  to  Innocent  of  Rome,  but  actually 
laid  before  Zosimus,  in  417,  consists  of  an  admirably  orthodox  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  incarnation,  an  expan- 
sion of  the  Nicene  formula  with  reference  to  perversions  of  the  faith 
by  various  heretics,  and  in  conclusion  a  statement  of  Pelagius's  own 
opinions  regarding  free  will,  grace,  and  sin.  It  is  due  to  the  irony  of 
history  that  it  should  have  been  found  among  the  works  of  both 
Jerome  and  Augustine,  long  passed  current  as  a  composition  of  Augus- 
tine, Sermo  CCXXXVI,  and  should  have  been  actually  quoted  by  the 
Sorbonne,  in  152 1,  in  its  articles  against  Luther.  It  also  appears  in  the 
Libri  Carolini,  III,  i,  as  an  orthodox  exposition  of  the  faith.  The  pas- 
sages which  bear  upon  the  characteristic  Pelagian  doctrine  are  here 
given.  Fragments  of  the  confessions  of  other  Pelagians,  e.  g.,  Caeles- 
tius,  and  Julius  of  Eclanum,  are  found  in  Hahn,  §§  210  and  211.  For 
the  proceedings  in  the  East,  see  Hefele,  §  118. 


462  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

We  hold  that  there  is  one  baptism,  which  we  assert  is  to  be 
administered  to  children  in  the  same  words  of  the  sacrament 
as  it  is  administered  to  adults.  .  .  . 

We  execrate  also  the  blasphemy  of  those  who  say  that  any- 
thing impossible  to  do  is  commanded  man  by  God,  and  the 
commands  of  God  can  be  observed,  not  by  individuals  but  by 
all  in  common,  also  those  who  with  the  Manichaeans  condemn 
first  marriages  or  with  the  Cataphrygians  condemn  second 
marriages.  .  .  .  We  so  confess  the  will  is  free  that  we  say  that 
we  always  need  the  aid  of  God,  and  they  err  who  with  the 
Manichaeans  assert  that  man  cannot  avoid  sins  as  well  as 
those  who  with  Jovinan  say  that  man  cannot  sin;  for  both 
take  away  the  liberty  of  the  will.  But  we  say  that  man  can 
both  sin  and  not  sin,  so  that  we  confess  that  we  always  have 
free  will. 

(g)  Augustine,  Sermo  131.  (MSL,  38  :  734.)  CJ.  Kirch, 
n.  672. 

Causa  finita  est. 

Late  in  416  synods  were  held  in  Carthage  and  Milcoe  condemning 
Pelagianism.  On  January  27,  417,  Innocent  wrote  to  the  Africans,  ap- 
proving their  councils  and  condemning  Pelagianism,  incidentally  stat- 
ing the  supreme  authority  of  the  Roman  See  and  requiring  that 
nothing  should  ever  be  definitively  settled  without  consulting  the  Apos- 
tolic See  (text  of  passage  in  Denziger,  ed.  1911,  n.  100).  September 
23  of  the  same  year,  about  the  time  when  Pelagius  and  Caslestius  were 
at  Rome  with  Zosimus  seeking  to  rehabilitate  themselves  in  the  West, 
Augustine  delivered  a  sermon  in  which  he  made  the  following  state- 
ment. It  is  the  basis  of  the  famous  phrase  Roma  locuta,  causa  finita 
est,  a  saying  which  is  apocryphal,  however,  and  not  found  in  the  works 
of  Augustine. 

What,  therefore,  is  said  concerning  the  Jews,  that  we  see 
in  them  [i.  e.,  the  Pelagians].  They  have  the  zeal  for  God; 
I  bear  witness,  that  they  have  a  zeal  for  God,  but  not  accord- 
ing to  knowledge.  Why  is  it  not  according  to  knowledge? 
Because,  being  ignorant  of  the  justice  of  God  and  wishing  to 
establish  their  own,  they  are  not  subject  to  the  righteousness 
of  God  [Rom.  10  :  2/.].     My  brethren,  have  patience  with  me. 


THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  463 

When  you  find  such,  do  not  conceal  them,  let  there  be  not 
false  mercy  in  you.  Most  certainly  when  you  find  such,  do 
not  conceal  them.  Refute  those  contradicting,  and  those 
resisting  bring  to  me.  For  already  two  councils  about  this 
case  have  been  sent  to  the  ApostoHc  See,  whence  also  re- 
scripts have  come.  The  case  has  been  ended;  would  that 
the  error  might  some  time  end !  Therefore  let  us  warn  them 
that  they  pay  attention;  let  us  teach  them  that  they  may  be 
instructed;    let  us  pray  that  they  may  be  changed. 

(//)  Zosimus,  III  Ep.  ad  Episcopos  Africce  de  causa  Ccelestii 
A.  D.  417.     (MSL,  45  :  1 72 1.)     CJ.  Bruckner,  op.  cit.,  n.  28. 

Fragments  of  his  later  Epistula  tractoria  together  with  other  letters 
may  be  found  in  Bruckner,  op.  cit. 

Likewise  Pelagius  sent  letters  also  containing  an  extended 
justification  of  himself,  to  which  he  added  a  profession  of  his 
faith,  what  he  condemned  and  what  he  followed,  without 
any  dissimulation,  so  that  all  subtihties  of  interpretation 
might  be  avoided.  There  was  a  public  recitation  of  these. 
They  contained  all  things  like  those  which  Caelestius  had 
previously  presented  and  expressed  in  the  same  sense  and 
drawn  up  in  the  same  thoughts.  Would  that  some  of  you, 
dearest  brethren,  could  have  been  present  at  the  reading  of 
the  letters.  What  was  the  joy  of  the  holy  men  who  were 
present;  what  was  the  admiration  of  each  of  them!  Some 
of  them  could  scarcely  restrain  themselves  from  tears  and 
weeping,  that  such  men  of  absolutely  correct  faith  could 
have  been  suspected.  Was  there  a  single  place  in  which  the 
grace  of  God  or  his  aid  was  omitted? 

{i)  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  418,  Canons.     Bruns,  I,  188. 

These  canons  of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  A.  D.  418,  were  incor- 
porated in  the  Codex  Canon  Ecclesice  Africance  adopted  at  the  Council 
of  Carthage  A.  D.  419.  The  numbers  given  in  brackets  are  the  num- 
bers in  that  Codex.  Interprovincial  councils  were  known  in  North 
Africa  as  "general  councils." 


464  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

In  the  consulate  of  the  most  glorious  emperors,  Honorius 
for  the  twelfth  time  and  Theodosius  for  the  eighth,  on  the 
calends  of  May,  at  Carthage  in  the  Secretarium  of  the  BasiHca 
of  Faustus,  when  Bishop  AureKus  presided  over  the  general 
council,  the  deacons  standing  by,  it  pleased  all  the  bishops, 
whose  names  and  subscriptions  are  indicated,  met  together 
in  the  holy  synod  of  the  church  of  Carthage: 

1  [109].  That  whosoever  should  say  that  Adam,  the  first 
man,  was  created  mortal,  so  that  whether  he  had  sinned  or 
not,  he  would  have  died  in  the  body — that  is,  he  would  have 
gone  forth  of  the  body,  not  because  of  the  desert  [or  merit]  of 
sin,  but  by  natural  necessity,  let  him  be  anathema. 

2  [no].  Likewise  that  whosoever  denies  that  infants 
newly  from  their  mother's  womb  should  be  baptized,  or  says 
that  baptism  is  for  remission  of  sins,  but  that  they  derive 
from  Adam  no  original  sin,  which  is  removed  by  the  laver  of 
regeneration,  whence  the  conclusion  follows  that  in  them 
the  form  of  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins  is  to  be  under- 
stood as  false  and  not  true,  let  him  be  anathema. 

For  not  otherwise  can  be  understood  what  the  Apostle 
says,  "By  one  man  sin  has  come  into  the  world,^  and  so  it 
passed  upon  all  men  in  that  all  have  sinned,"  than  as  the 
CathoKc  Church  everywhere  diffused  has  always  understood 
it.  For  on  account  of  this  rule  of  faith,  even  infants,  who 
could  have  committed  no  sin  themselves,  therefore  are  truly 
baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  in  order  that  what  in  them 
is  the  result  of  generation  may  be  cleansed  by  regeneration. 

3  [in].  Likewise,  that  whoever  should  say  that  the  grace 
of  God,  by  which  a  man  is  justified  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord,  avails  only  for  the  remission  of  past  sins,  and  not  for 
assistance  against  committing  sins  in  the  future,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

4  [112].  Also,  whoever  shall  say  that  the  same  grace  of 
God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  helps  us  not  to  sin  only 
in  that  by  it  are  revealed  to  us  and  opened  to  our  understand- 

^  Some  manuscripts  add  "and  death  through  sin." 


THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  465 

ing  the  commandments,  so  that  we  may  know  what  to  seek, 
what  we  ought  to  avoid,  and  also  that  we  should  love  to  do  so, 
but  that  through  it  we  are  not  helped  so  that  we  are  able  to 
do  what  we  know  we  should  do,  let  him  be  anathema.  For 
when  the  Apostle  says,  "Wisdom  puffeth  up,  but  charity 
edifieth,"  it  were  truly  infamous  were  we  to  believe  that  we 
have  the  grace  of  Christ  for  that  which  puffeth  us  up,  but  have 
it  not  for  that  which  edifieth,  since  each  is  the  gift  of  God, 
both  to  know  what  we  ought  to  do,  and  to  love  it  so  as  to  do 
it;  so  that  wisdom  cannot  puff  us  up  while  charity  is  edifying 
us.  For  as  it  is  written  of  God,  ''Who  teacheth  man  knowl- 
edge," so  also  it  is  written,  "Love  is  of  God." 

5  [113].  It  seemed  good  that  whosoever  should  say  that 
the  grace  of  justification  is  given  to  us  only  that  we  might 
be  able  more  readily  by  grace  to  perform  what  we  were  com- 
manded to  do  through  our  free  will;  as  if  when  grace  was  not 
given,  although  not  easily,  yet  nevertheless  we  could  even 
without  grace  fulfil  the  divine  commandments,  let  him  be 
anathema.  For  the  Lord  spake  concerning  the  fruits  of  the 
commandments,  when  he  said,  "Without  me  ye  can  do  noth- 
ing," and  not  "Without  me  ye  can  do  it  but  with  difficulty." 

6  [114].  It  seemed  also  good  that  as  St.  John  the  Apostle 
says,  "If  ye  shall  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  our- 
selves and  the  truth  is  not  in  us";  whosoever  thinks  that  this 
should  be  so  understood  as  to  mean  that  out  of  humility  we 
ought  to  say  that  we  have  sin,  and  not  because  it  is  really  so, 
let  him  be  anathema.  For  the  Apostle  goes  on  to  add,  "But 
if  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our 
sins  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  iniquity,"  where  it  is  sufficiently 
clear  that  this  is  said  not  only  in  humiHty  but  also  in  truth. 
For  the  Apostle  might  have  said,  "If  we  shall  say  we  have  no 
sins  we  shall  extol  ourselves,  and  humility  is  not  in  us";  but 
when  he  says,  "we  deceive  ourselves  and  the  truth  is  not  in 
us,"  he  sufficiently  intimates  that  he  who  affirmed  that  he 
had  no  sin  would  speak  not  that  which  is  true  but  that  which 
is  false. 


466  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

7  [115].  It  has  seemed  good  that  whosoever  should  say 
that  when  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  saints  say,  "Forgive  us 
our  trespasses,"  they  say  this  not  for  themselves,  because 
they  have  no  need  of  this  petition,  but  for  the  rest  who  are 
sinners  of  the  people;  and  that  therefore  none  of  the  saints 
can  say,  "Forgive  me  my  trespasses,"  but  "Forgive  us  our 
trespasses";  so  that  the  just  is  understood  to  seek  this  for 
others  rather  than  for  himself,  let  him  be  anathema. 

8  [116].  Likewise  it  seemed  good,  that  whosoever  asserts 
that  these  words  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  when  they  say,  "Forgive 
us  our  trespasses,"  are  said  by  the  saints  out  of  humility  and 
not  in  truth,  let  them  be  anathema. 

The  following  canon,  although  it  seems  to  have  been  enacted  for  the 
case  of  Apiarius,  is  nevertheless  often  cited  in  the  same  connection 
as  the  eight  against  Pelagius,  and  is  therefore  given  here  for  the  sake  of 
convenience. 

18  [125].  Likewise,  it  seemed  good  that  presbyters,  dea- 
cons, or  other  of  the  lower  clergy  who  are  to  be  tried,  if  they 
question  the  decision  of  their  bishops,  the  neighboring  bish- 
ops having  been  invited  by  them  with  the  consent  of  their 
bishops  shall  hear  them  and  determine  whatever  separates 
them.  But  should  they  think  that  an  appeal  should  be  car- 
ried from  them,  let  them  not  carry  the  appeal  except  to 
African  councils  or  to  the  primates  of  their  provinces.  But 
whoso  shall  think  of  carrying  an  appeal  across  the  seas,  shall 
be  admitted  to  communion  by  no  one  in  Africa.^ 

§  85.    Semi-Pelagian  Controversy 

With  the  condemnation  of  Pelagianism  the  doctrine  of 
Augustine  in  its  logically  worked  out  details  was  not  neces- 
sarily approved.  The  necessity  of  baptism  for  the  remission 
of  sins  in  all  cases  was  approved  as  well  as  the  necessity  of 
grace.  The  doctrine  of  predestination,  an  essential  feature 
in  the  Augustinian  system,  was  not  only  not  accepted  but  was 

1  For  the  discussion  on  appeals  across  the  sea,  i.  e.,  to  Rome,  see  Hefele, 
§  119;  A.  W.  Haddan,  art.  "Appeal"  in  DCA. 


SEMI-PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  467 

vigorously  opposed  by  many  who  heartily  condemned  Pela- 
gianism.  The  ensuing  discussion,  known  as  the  Semi-Pelagian 
controversy  (427-529),  was  largely  carried  on  in  Gaul,  which 
after  the  Vandal  occupation  of  North  Africa,  became  the  intel- 
lectual centre  of  the  Church  in  the  West.  The  leading  oppo- 
nent of  Augustine  was  John  Cassian  (ob.  435),  abbot  of  a 
monastery  at  Marseilles,  hence  the  term  Massilians  apphed 
to  his  party,  and  his  pupil,  Vincent  of  Lerins,  author  of  Com- 
monitorium,  written  434.  The  chief  Augustinians  were  Hilary 
and  Prosper  of  Aquitaine.  The  discussion  was  not  con- 
tinuous. About  475  it  broke  out  again  when  Lucidus  was 
condemned  at  a  council  at  Lyons  and .  forced  to  retract  his 
predestinarian  views;  and  again  about  520.  The  matter  re- 
ceived what  is  regarded  as  its  solution  in  the  Council  of 
Orange,  529,  confirmed  by  Boniface  II  in  531.  By  the  de- 
crees of  this  council  so  much  of  the  Augustinian  system  as 
could  be  combined  with  the  teaching  and  practice  of  the 
Church  as  to  the  sacraments  was  formally  approved. 

(a)  John  Cassian,  Collationes,  XIII,  y  f.     (MSL,  49  :  908.) 

John  Cassian,  born  about  360,  was  by  birth  and  education  a  man  of 
the  East,  and  does  not  appear  in  the  West  until  405,  when  he  went  to 
Rome  on  some  business  connected  with  the  exile  of  Chrysostom,  his 
friend  and  patron.  In  415  he  established  two  monasteries  at  Mar- 
seilles, one  for  men  and  the  other  for  women.  He  had  himself  been 
educated  as  a  monk  and  made  a  careful  study  of  monasticism  in  Egypt 
and  Palestine.  Western  monasticism  is  much  indebted  to  him  for 
his  writings,  De  Institutis  Cxnohiorum  and  the  Collationes.  In  the 
former,  he  describes  the  monastic  system  of  Palestine  and  Egypt  and 
the  principal  vices  to  which  the  monastic  hfe  is  liable;  in  the  latter, 
divided  into  three  parts,  Cassian  gives  reports  or  what  purports  to  be 
reports  of  conversations  he  and  his  friend  Germanus  had  with  Egyp- 
tian ascetics.  These  books  were  very  popular  during  the  Middle  Ages 
and  exerted  a  wide  influence. 

Ch.  7.  When  His  [God's]  kindness  sees  in  us  even  the  very 
smallest  spark  of  good-will  shining  forth  or  which  He  himself 
has,  as  it  were,  struck  out  from  the  hard  flints  of  our  hearts. 
He  fans  it  and  fosters  it  and  nurses  it  with  His  breath,  as  He 
"will  have  all  men  to  be  saved  and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge 


468  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

of  the  truth"  [I  Tim.  2:4].  ..  .  For  He  is  true  and  lieth 
not  when  He  lays  down  with  an  oath:  "As  I  Kve,  saith  the 
Lord,  I  will  not  the  death  of  a  sinner,  but  that  he  should  turn 
from  his  way  and  live"  [Ezek.  33  :  11].  For  if  He  willeth 
not  that  one  of  His  Httle  ones  should  perish,  how  can  we 
think  without  grievous  blasphemy  that  He  willeth  not  all 
men  universally,  but  only  some  instead  of  all  to  be  saved. 
Those  then  who  perish,  perish  against  His  will,  as  He  testi- 
fieth  against  each  of  them  day  by  day:  "Turn  from  your  evil 
ways,  for  why  will  ye  die,  0  house  of  Israel?"  [Ezek.  33  :  11.] 
.  .  .  The  grace  of  Christ  is  then  at  hand  every  day,  which, 
while  it  "willeth  all  men  to  be  saved  and  come  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,"  calleth  all  without  exception,  saying: 
"Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor  and  are  heavy  laden  and  I 
will  give  you  rest"  [Matt.  11  :  28].  But  if  he  calls  not  all 
generally  but  only  some,  it  follows  that  not  all  are  heavy 
laden  with  either  original  sin  or  actual  sin,  and  that  this  say- 
ing is  not  a  true  one:  "For  all  have  sinned  and  come  short  of 
the  glory  of  God"  [Rom.  3  :  23];  nor  can  we  beheve  that 
"death  passed  on  all  men"  [Rom.  5  :  12].  And  so  far  do 
all  who  perish,  perish  against  the  will  of  God,  that  God  cannot 
be  said  to  have  made  death,  as  the  Scripture  itself  testifieth: 
"For  God  made  not  death,  neither  hath  He  pleasure  in  the 
destruction  of  the  living"  [Wisdom  i  :  13]. 

Ch.  8.  When  He  sees  anything  of  a  good- will  arisen  in  us 
He  at  once  enlightens  it  and  strengthens  it  and  urges  it  on  to 
salvation,  giving  increase  to  that  which  He  himself  implanted 
or  He  sees  to  have  arisen  by  our  own  effort. 

Ch.  9.  .  .  .  But  that  it  may  be  still  more  evident  that 
through  the  good  of  nature,  which  is  bestowed  by  the  kind- 
ness of  the  Creator,  sometimes  the  beginnings  of  a  good-will 
arise,  yet  cannot  come  to  the  completion  of  virtue  unless 
they  are  directed  by  the  Lord,  the  Apostle  is  a  witness,  say- 
ing: "For  to  will  is  present  with  me,  but  to  perform  what  is 
good  I  find  not"  [Rom.  7  :  18]. 

Ch.  II.  ...  If  we  say  that  the  beginnings  of  a  good- will 


SEMI-PELAGIAN   CONTROVERSY  469 

are  always  inspired  in  us  by  the  grace  of  God,  what  shall  we 
say  about  the  faith  of  Zacchaeus,  or  of  the  piety  of  that  thief 
upon  the  cross,  who  by  their  own  desire  brought  violence  to 
bear  upon  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  and  so  anticipated  the 
special  leadings  of  their  calHngs?  .  .  . 

Ch.  12.  We  should  not  hold  that  God  made  man  such 
that  he  neither  wills  nor  is  able  to  do  good.  Otherwise  He 
has  not  granted  him  a  free  will,  if  He  has  suffered  him  only  to 
will  or  be  capable  of  evil,  but  of  himself  neither  to  will  nor  be 
capable  of  what  is  good.  ...  It  cannot,  therefore,  be  doubted 
that  there  are  by  nature  seeds  of  goodness  implanted  in  every 
soul  by  the  kindness  of  the  Creator;  but  unless  these  are  quick- 
ened by  the  assistance  of  God,  they  will  not  be  able  to  attain 
to  an  increase  of  perfection;  for,  as  the  blessed  Apostle  says: 
''Neither  is  he  that  planteth  anything  nor  he  that  watereth, 
but  God  that  giveth  the  increase"  [I  Cor.  3:7].  But  that 
freedom  of  will  is  to  some  degree  in  a  man's  power  is  very 
clearly  taught  in  the  book  called  The  Pastor,^  where  two 
angels  are  said  to  be  attached  to  each  one  of  us,  i.  e.,  a  good  and 
a  bad  one,  while  it  lies  in  a  man's  own  option  to  choose  which 
to  follow.  And,  therefore,  the  will  always  remains  free  in 
man,  and  it  can  either  neglect  or  dehght  in  the  grace  of  God. 
For  the  Apostle  would  not  have  commanded,  saying,  "Work 
out  your  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling"  [Phil.  2  :  12], 
had  he  not  known  that  it  could  be  advanced  or  neglected  by 
us.  .  .  .  But  that  they  should  not  think  that  they  did  not  need 
divine  aid  he  adds:  ''For  it  is  God  who  worketh  in  you  both 
to  will  and  accomplish  His  good  pleasure"  [Phil.  2  :  13]. 
The  mercy  of  the  Lord,  therefore,  goes  before  the  will  of  man, 
for  it  is  said,  "My  God  will  prevent  me  with  His  mercy" 
[Psahn  59  :  10],  and  again,  that  He  may  put  our  desire  to  the 
test,  our  will  goes  before  God  who  waits,  and  for  our  good 
delays. 

(6)  Vincent  of  Lerins,  Commonitorium,  chs.  2,  23,  26.  (MSL, 
50 -.659.) 

1  Hermas,  Pastor,  ]\Ian.  VI.     (ANF,  vol.  II.) 


470  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

The  rule  of  Catholic  verity. 

Vincent  of  Lerins  wrote  his  Conimonitorium  in  434,  three  years  after 
the  death  of  Augustine,  who  had  been  commended  in  432  to  the  clergy 
of  Gaul  by  Celestine  of  Rome  [Ep.  21;  Denziger,  nn.  128-142;  Mansi 
IV,  454  f.].  Vincent  attacked  Augustine  in  his  Commonitoriiim,  not 
openly,  but,  so  far  as  the  work  has  been  preserved,  covertly,  under  the 
pseudonym  of  Peregrinus.  The  work  consists  of  two  books,  of  which 
the  second  is  lost  with  the  exception  of  what  appear  to  be  some  con- 
cluding chapters,  or  a  summary  taking  the  place  of  the  book.  In  the 
first  book  he  lays  down  the  general  principle  as  to  the  tests  of  Catholic 
truth.  In  doing  so  he  is  careful  to  point  out  several  cases  of  very 
great  teachers,  renowned  for  learning,  ability,  and  influence,  who, 
nevertheless,  erred  against  the  test  of  Catholic  truth,  and  brought  for- 
ward opinions  which,  on  account  of  their  novelty,  were  false.  It  is 
a  working  out  in  detail  of  the  principles  of  the  idea  of  Tertullian  in  his 
De  Prcescriptione  [v.  supra,  §  27].  The  Augustinian  doctrines  of  pre- 
destination and  grace  could  not  stand  the  test  of  the  appeal  to  an- 
tiquity. After  laying  down  his  test  of  truth  it  appears  to  have  been 
the  author's  intention  to  prove  thereby  the  doctrine  of  Augustine 
false.  The  so-called  "Vincentian  rule"  is  often  quoted  without  a 
thought  that  it  was  intended,  primarily,  as  an  attack  upon  Augustine. 
The  Commonitorium  may  be  found  translated  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XL 

Ch.  2  [4].  I  have  often  inquired  earnestly  and  attentively 
of  very  many  men  eminent  for  sanctity  and  learning,  how 
and  by  what  sure  and,  so  to  speak,  universal  rule  I  might  be 
able  to  distinguish  the  truth  of  the  Catholic  faith  from  the 
falsehood  of  heretical  pravity,  and  I  have  always,  and  from 
nearly  all,  received  an  answer  to  this  effect:  That  whether  I 
or  any  one  else  should  wish  to  detect  the  frauds  of  heretics 
as  they  arise,  or  to  avoid  their  snares,  and  to  continue 
sound  and  complete  in  the  faith,  we  must,  the  Lord  help- 
ing, fortify  our  faith  in  two  ways:  first,  by  the  authority  of 
the  divine  Law,  and  then,  by  the  tradition  of  the  Catholic 
Church. 

But  here  some  one,  perhaps,  will  ask:  Since  the  canon  of 
Scripture  is  complete  and  sufficient  for  everything,  and  more 
than  sufhcient,  what  need  is  there  to  add  to  it  the  authority 
of  the  Church's  interpretation?  For  this  reason:  because, 
owing  to  the  depth  of  Holy  Scripture,  all  do  not  accept  it 
in  one  and  the  same  sense,  but  one  understands  its  words 


SEMI-PELAGIAN   CONTROVERSY  471 

one  way,  another  in  another  way;  so  that  almost  as  many 
opinions  may  be  drawn  from  it  as  there  are  men.  .  .  .  There- 
fore it  is  very  necessary,  on  account  of  so  great  intricacies, 
and  of  such  various  errors,  that  the  rule  of  a  right  under- 
standing of  the  prophets  and  Apostles  should  be  framed  in 
accordance  with  the  standard  of  ecclesiastical  and  Catholic 
interpretation. 

Moreover,  in  the  Catholic  Church  itself  all  possible  care 
should  be  taken  that  we  hold  that  faith  which  has  been  be- 
lieved everywhere,  always,  and  by  all.  For  that  is  truly 
and  properly  ^'Cathohc"  which,  as  the  name  impKes  and  the 
reason  of  the  thing  declares,  comprehends  all  universally. 
This  will  be  the  case  if  we  follow  universality,  antiquity,  and 
consent.  We  shall  follow  universality  in  this  way,  if  we  con- 
fess that  one  faith  to  be  true  which  the  whole  Church  through- 
out the  world  confesses;  antiquity,  if  we  in  nowise  depart 
from  those  interpretations  which  it  is  manifest  were  notori- 
ously held  by  our  holy  ancestors  and  fathers;  consent  in  like 
manner,  if  in  antiquity  itself  we  adhere  to  the  consentient 
definitions  and  determinations  of  all,  or  at  least  almost  all, 
priests  and  doctors. 

Ch.  23  [59].  The  Church  of  Christ,  the  careful  and  watch- 
ful guardian  of  the  doctrines  deposited  in  her  charge,  never 
changes  anything  in  them,  never  diminishes,  never  adds;  does 
not  cut  off  what  is  necessary,  does  not  add  what  is  super- 
fluous, does  not  lose  her  own,  does  not  appropriate  what,  is 
another's,  but,  while  deahng  faithfully  and  judiciously  with 
ancient  doctrine,  keeps  this  one  object  carefully  in  view — if 
there  be  anything  which  antiquity  has  left  shapeless  and  rudi- 
mentary, to  fashion  and  to  pohsh  it;  if  anything  already  re- 
duced to  shape  and  developed,  to  consoHdate  and  strengthen 
it;  if  any  already  ratified  and  defined,  to  keep  and  guard  it. 
Finally,  what  other  objects  have  councils  ever  aimed  at  in 
their  decrees,  than  to  provide  that  what  was  before  beUeved 
in  simpKcity,  should  in  the  future  be  believed  intelligently; 
that  what  was  before  preached  coldly,  should  in  the  future  be 


472  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

preached  earnestly ;  that  what  before  was  practised  negligent- 
ly, should  henceforth  be  practised  with  double  solicitude? 

Passage  referring  especially  to  Augustine. 

Ch.  26  [69].  But  what  do  they  say?  ''If  thou  be  the  Son 
of  God,  cast  thyself  down";  that  is,  "If  thou  wouldest  be 
a  son  of  God,  and  wouldest  receive  the  inheritance  of  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven,  cast  thyself  down ;  that  is,  cast  thyself  down 
from  the  doctrine  and  tradition  of  that  sublime  Church,  which 
is  imagined  to  be  nothing  less  than  the  very  temple  of  God." 
And  if  one  should  ask  one  of  the  heretics  who  gives  this  advice : 
How  do  you  prove  it?  What  ground  have  you  for  saying 
that  I  ought  to  cast  away  the  universal  and  ancient  faith  of 
the  Catholic  Church?  he  has  only  the  answer  ready:  ''For  it 
is  written";  and  forthwith  he  produces  a  thousand  testimo- 
nies, a  thousand  examples,  a  thousand  authorities  from  the 
Law,  from  the  Psalms,  from  the  Apostles,  from  the  prophets, 
by  means  of  which,  interpreted  on  a  new  and  wrong  principle, 
the  unhappy  soul  is  precipitated  from  the  height  of  CathoHc 
truth  to  the  lowest  abyss  of  heresy.  Then  with  the  accom- 
panying promises,  the  heretics  are  wont  marvellously  to  be- 
guile the  incautious.  For  they  dare  to  teach  and  promise 
that  in  their  church,  that  is,  in  the  conventicle  of  their  com- 
munion, there  is  a  certain  great  and  special  and  altogether 
personal  grace  of  God,  so  that  whosoever  pertain  to  their 
number,  without  any  labor,  without  any  effort,  without  any 
industry,  even  though  they  neither  ask,  nor  seek,  nor  knock, ^ 
have  such  a  dispensation  from  God,  that  borne  up  of  angel 
hands,  that  is,  preserved  by  the  protection  of  angels,  it  is  im- 
possible they  should  ever  dash  their  feet  against  a  stone,  that 
is,  that  they  should  ever  be  offended. 

(c)  Council  of  Orange,  A.  D.  529,  Canons.  Bruns  II,  176. 
Cf.  Denziger,  n.  174. 

^  The  references  are  to  Augustine,  De  Dono  Perseverantice,  ch.  23  [64],  and 
to  Prosper  of  Aquitaine's  epistle  to  Augustine,  see  Augustine,  Ep.  225.  Citations 
from  both  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XI,  p.  158. 


SEMI-PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  473 

The  end  of  the  Semi-Pelagian  controversy. 

The  Council  of  Orange,  A.  D.  529,  was  made  up  of  several  bishops 
and  some  lay  notables  who  had  gathered  for  the  dedication  of  a  church 
at  Orange.  Ca^sarius  of  Aries  had  received  from  Felix  IV  of  Rome 
eight  statements  against  the  Semi-Pelagian  teaching.  He  added  some 
more  of  his  own  to  them,  and  had  them  passed  as  canons  by  the  com- 
pany gathered  for  the  dedication.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  lay 
notables  signed  along  with  the  bishops.  Boniface  II,  to  whom  the 
canons  were  sent,  confirmed  them  in  532:  "We  approve  your  above 
written  confession  as  agreeable  to  the  Catholic  rule  of  the  Fathers." 
Cf.  Hefele,  §  242.  For  the  sources  of  the  canons,  see  Seeberg,  History 
of  Doctrines,  Eng.  trans.,  I,  380,  note  3.  For  the  sake  of  brevity  the 
scriptural  quotations  are  not  given,  merely  indicated  by  references 
to  the  Bible. 

Canon  i.  Whoever  says  that  by  the  offence  of  the  dis- 
obedience of  Adam  not  the  entire  man,  that  is,  in  body  and 
soul,  was  changed  for  the  worse,  but  that  the  freedom  of 
his  soul  remained  uninjured,  and  his  body  only  was  subject 
to  corruption,  has  been  deceived  by  the  error  of  Pelagius 
and  opposes  Scripture  [Ezek.  18:20;  Rom.  6:16;  II  Peter 
2  :  19]. 

Canon  2.  Whoever  asserts  that  the  transgression  of  Adam 
injured  himself  only,  and  not  his  offspring,  or  that  death  only 
of  the  body,  which  is  the  penalty  of  sin,  but  not  also  sin,  which 
is  the  death  of  the  soul,  passed  by  one  man  to  the  entire  human 
race,  wrongs  God  and  contradicts  the  Apostle  [Rom.  5  :  12]. 

Canon  3.  Whoever  says  that  the  grace  of  God  can  be  be- 
stowed in  reply  to  human  petition,  but  not  that  the  grace 
brings  it  about  so  that  it  is  asked  for  by  us,  contradicts  Isaiah 
the  prophet  and  the  Apostle  [Is.  65:  i;  Rom.  10:  20]. 

Canon  4.  Whoever  contends  that  our  will,  to  be  set  free 
from  sin,  may  anticipate  God's  action,  and  shall  not  confess 
that  it  is  brought  about  by  the  infusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  his  operation  in  us,  that  we  wish  to  be  set  free,  resists  that 
same  Holy  Spirit  speaking  through  Solomon:  ''  The  will  is  pre- 
pared by  the  Lord"  [Proverbs  8  :  35,  cf.  LXX;  not  so  in 
Vulgate  or  Heb.],  and  the  Apostle  [Phil.  2  :  13]. 

Canon  5.  Whoever  says  the  increase,  as  also  the  beginning 
of  faith  and  the  desire  of  believing,  by  which  we  believe  in 


474  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Him  who  justifies  the  impious,  and  we  come  to  the  birth  of 
holy  baptism,  is  not  by  the  free  gift  of  grace,  that  is,  by  the 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit  turning  our  will  from  unbelief 
to  belief,  from  impiety  to  piety,  but  belongs  naturally  to  us, 
is  declared  an  adversary  of  the  apostolic  preaching  [Phil. 
I  :6;  Ephes.  2  : 8].  For  they  say  that  faith  by  which  we 
believe  in  God  is  natural,  and  they  declare  that  all  those  who 
are  strangers  to  the  Church  of  Christ  in  some  way  are  be- 
lieving. 

Canon  6.  Whoever  says  that  to  us  who,  without  the  grace 
of  God,  believe,  will,  desire,  attempt,  struggle  for,  watch, 
strive  for,  demand,  ask,  knock,  mercy  is  divinely  bestowed, 
and  does  not  rather  confess  that  it  is  brought  about  by  the 
infusion  and  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  us  that  beheve, 
will,  and  do  all  these  other  things  as  we  ought,  and  annexes 
the  help  of  grace  to  human  humiHty  and  obedience,  and  does 
not  admit  that  it  is  the  gift  of  that  same  grace  that  we  are 
obedient  and  humble,  opposes  the  Apostle  [I  Cor.  4:7]. 

Canon  7.  Whoever  asserts  that  by  the  force  of  nature  we 
can  rightly  think  or  choose  anything  good,  which  pertains  to 
eternal  life,  or  be  saved,  that  is,  assent  to  the  evangeHcal 
preaching,  without  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who 
gives  to  all  grace  to  assent  to  and  believe  the  truth,  is  de- 
ceived by  an  heretical  spirit,  not  understanding  the  voice  of 
the  Lord  [John  15  15],  and  of  the  Apostle  [II  Cor.  3  :  5]. 

Canon  8.  Whoever  asserts  that  some  by  mercy,  others  by 
free  will,  which  in  all  who  have  been  born  since  the  trans- 
gression of  the  first  man  is  evidently  corrupt,  are  able  to  come 
to  the  grace  of  baptism,  is  proved  an  alien  from  the  faith. 
For  he  asserts  that  the  free  will  of  all  has  not  been  weakened 
by  the  sin  of  the  first  man,  or  he  evidently  thinks  that  it  has 
been  so  injured  that  some,  however,  are  able  without  the 
revelation  of  God  to  attain,  by  their  own  power,  to  the 
mystery  of  eternal  salvation.  Because  the  Lord  himself 
shows  how  false  this  is,  who  declares  that  not  some,  but  no 
one  was  able  to  come  to  Him  unless  the  Father  drew  him 


SEMI-PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY  475 

[John  6:4],  and  said  so  to  Peter  [Matt.  16  :  17]  and  the  Apostle 
[I  Cor.  12:3]. 

The  canons  that  follow  are  less  important.  The  whole  concludes 
with  a  brief  statement  regarding  the  points  at  issue,  as  follows: 

And  so  according  to  the  above  sentences  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures and  definitions  of  ancient  Fathers,  by  God's  aid,  we  be- 
lieve that  we  ought  to  believe  and  preach: 

That  by  the  sin  of  the  first  man,  free  will  was  so  turned 
aside  and  weakened  that  afterward  no  one  is  able  to  love  God 
as  he  ought,  or  believe  in  God,  or  do  anything  for  God, 
which  is  good,  except  the  grace  of  divine  mercy  comes  first 
to  him  [Phil.  1:6,  29;  Ephes.  2:8;  I  Cor.  4:7,  7:25; 
James  i  :  17;   John  3  :  27].  .  .  . 

We  also  believe  this  to  be  according  to  the  Catholic  faith, 
that  grace  having  been  received  in  baptism,  aU  who  have  been 
baptized,  can  and  ought,  by  the  aid  and  support  of  Christ,  to 
perform  those  things  which  belong  to  the  salvation  of  the  soul, 
if  they  labor  faithfully. 

But  not  only  do  we  not  believe  that  some  have  been  pre- 
destinated to  evil  by  the  divine  power,  but  also,  if  there  are 
any  who  wish  to  believe  so  evil  a  thing,  we  say  to  them,  with 
all  detestation,  anathema. 

Also  this  we  profitably  confess  and  believe,  that  in  every 
good  we  do  not  begin  and  afterward  are  assisted  by  the  mercy 
of  God,  but  without  any  good  desert  preceding,  He  first  in- 
spires in  us  faith  and  love  in  Him,  so  that  we  both  faithfully 
seek  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  and  after  baptism  with  His 
help  are  able  to  perform  those  things  which  are  pleasing  to 
Him.  Whence  it  is  most  certainly  to  be  beheved  that  in  the 
case  of  that  thief,  whom  the  Lord  called  to  the  fatherland  of 
paradise,  and  Cornelius  the  Centurion,  to  whom  an  angel  of 
the  Lord  was  sent,  and  Zacch^eus,  who  was  worthy  of  receiv- 
ing the  Lord  himself,  their  so  wonderful  faith  was  not  of 
nature,  but  was  the  gift  of  the  divine  bounty. 

And  because  we  desire  and  wish  our  definition  of  the  ancient 


476  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Fathers,  written  above,  to  be  a  medicine  not  only  for  the 
clergy  but  also  for  the  laity,  it  has  been  decided  that  the 
illustrious  and  noble  men,  who  have  assembled  with  us  at 
the  aforesaid  festival,  shall  subscribe  it  with  their  own  hand. 


§  86.    The  Roman  Church  as  the  Centre  of  the  Cath- 
olic Roman  Element  of  the  West 

In  the  confusion  of  the  fifth  century,  when  the  provinces 
of  the  Roman  Empire  were  being  lopped  off  one  by  one,  Italy 
invaded,  and  the  larger  poHtical  institutions  disappearing, 
the  Church  was  the  one  institution  that  maintained  itself. 
In  not  a  few  places  among  the  barbarians  the  bishops  became 
the  acknowledged  heads  of  the  Roman  element  of  the  com- 
munities.   In  meeting  the  threatened  invasion  of  Italy  by 
Attila,  Leo  was  the  representative  of  the  Roman  people,  the 
head  of  the  embassy  sent  to  induce  the  Hun  to  recross  the 
Danube.     Under  such  circumstances  the  see  of  Rome  con- 
stantly gained  in  importance  politically  and  ecclesiastically. 
As  a  centre  of  unity  it  was  far  more  powerful  than  a  feeble 
emperor  at  Ravenna  or  puppets  set  up  by  barbarians.     It 
was  the  one  and  only  great  link  between  the  provinces  and 
the  representative  of  the  ancient  order.    It  represented  Rome, 
an   efhcient   and  generally  gratefully  recognized   authority. 
In  the  development  of  the  papal  idea  the  first  stadium  was 
completed  with  the  pontificate  of  Leo  the  Great  (440-461), 
who,  fully  conscious  of  the  inherited  Petrine  prerogatives, 
expressed  them  the  most  clearly,  persistently,  and,  on  the 
whole,  most  successfully  of  any  pontiff  before  Gregory  the 
Great.     Leo,  therefore,  stands  at  the  end  of  a  development 
marked  by  the  utterances  of  Victor,  Cornelius,  Siricius,  Inno- 
cent I,  Zosimus,  Boniface  I,  and  Celestine.     For  their  state- 
ments of  the  authority  of  the  Roman  see,  see  Denziger,  under 
their  names,  also  Kirch  and  Mirbt.     The  whole  may  be  found 
combined  in  one  statement  in  Schwanne,  Dogmengeschichte,  I, 
413/.;  II,  661-698. 


THE  ROMAN  CHURCH  477 

Additional  source  material:  In  English  there  is  comparatively  little 
except  the  writings  of  Leo,  see  especially  Ser monies  2,  82,  84;  Epistulm 
4,  6,  10,  12,  13,  14,  17,  105,  167;  Jerome,  Ep.  146,  ad  Evangelum.  Kirch, 
Mirbt,  and  Denziger  give  many  references  to  original  texts  and  cita- 
tions. 

{a)  Leo  the  Great,  Sermo  3.     (MSL,  55  :  145  /.) 

On  the  prerogatives  of  Peter  and  his  see. 

Ch.  2.  .  .  .  From  His  overruling  and  eternal  providence 
we  have  received  also  the  support  of  the  Apostle's  aid,  which 
assuredly  does  not  cease  from  its  operation;  and  the  strength 
of  the  foundation,  on  which  the  whole  lofty  building  of  the 
Church  is  reared,  is  not  weakened  by  the  weight  of  the  tem- 
ple that  rests  upon  it.  For  the  sohdity  of  that  faith  which 
was  praised  in  the  chief  of  the  Apostles  is  perpetual;  and,  as 
that  remains  which  Peter  beheved  in  Christ,  so  that  remains 
which  Christ  instituted  in  Peter.  For  when,  as  has  been  read 
in  the  Gospel  lesson  [i.  e.,  for  the  day],  the  Lord  has  asked  the 
disciples  whom  they  beheved  Him  to  be,  amid  the  various 
opinions  that  were  held,  the  blessed  Peter  repHed,  saying: 
*'Thou  art  the  Christ,"  etc.  [Matt.  16: 16-19]. 

Ch.  3.  The  dispensation  of  the  truth  therefore  abides, 
and  the  blessed  Peter,  persevering  in  the  strength  of  the  rock 
which  he  has  received,  has  not  abandoned  the  helm  of  the 
Church  which  he  undertook.  For  he  was  ordained  before 
the  rest  in  such  a  way. that  since  he  is  called  the  rock,  since 
he  is  pronounced  the  foundation,  since  he  is  constituted  the 
doorkeeper  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  since  he  is  set  up  as 
the  judge  to  bind  and  to  loose,  whose  judgments  shall  retain 
their  vahdity  in  heaven,  from  all  these  mystical  titles  we  might 
know  the  nature  of  his  association  with  Christ.  And  still 
to-day  he  more  fully  and  effectually  performs  what  is  in- 
trusted to  him,  and  carries  out  every  part  of  his  duty  and 
charge  in  Him  and  with  Him,  through  whom  he  has  been 
glorified.  And  so  if  anything  is  rightly  done  or  rightly  de- 
creed by  us,  if  anything  is  obtained  from  the  mercy  of  God 
by  daily  suppHcations,  it  is  his  work  and  merits  whose  power 


478  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

lives  in  his  see  and  whose  authority  excels.  For  this,  dearly 
beloved,  that  confession  gained,  that  confession  which,  in- 
spired in  the  Apostle's  heart  by  God  the  Father,  transcends 
all  the  uncertainty  of  human  opinions,  and  was  endued  with 
the  firmness  of  a  rock,  which  no  assaults  could  shake.  For 
throughout  the  Church  Peter  daily  says,  ''Thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Hving  God,"  and  every  tongue  which 
confesses  the  Lord  is  inspired  by  the  instruction  [magisterio] 
of  that  voice. 

{h)  Leo  the  Great,  Ep,  104,  ad  Marcianum  Augustum,  A.  D. 
452.     (MSL,  54  :  993.) 

Condemnation  of  the  twenty-eighth  canon  of  Chalcedon. 

This  and  the  two  following  epistles  upon  the  twenty-eighth  canon  of 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon  define  the  relation  of  the  Roman  see  to 
councils,  canons,  and  patriarchal  sees.  Apostolic  sees  may  not  be  con- 
stituted by  mere  canon;  political  importance  of  a  place  does  not  regulate 
its  ecclesiastical  position;  the  see  of  Rome  can  reject  the  canons  of 
councils  even  though  general;  apostohc  sees  connected  with  Peter  may 
not  have  their  authority  diminished.  For  the  twenty-eighth  canon  of 
Chalcedon,  v.  infra,  §  90,  d. 

Ch.  3.  Let  the  city  of  Constantinople  have,  as  we  de- 
sire, its  glory,  and  may  it,  under  the  protection  of  God's  right 
hand,  long  enjoy  the  rule  of  your  clemency.  Yet  the  basis 
of  things  secular  is  one,  and  the  basis  of  things  divine  another; 
and  there  can  be  no  sure  building  save  on  that  rock  which  the 
Lord  laid  as  a  foundation.  He  that  covets  what  is  not  his  due, 
loses  what  is  his  own.  Let  it  be  enough  for  the  aforesaid 
[Anatolius,  bishop  of  Constantinople]  that  by  the  aid  of  your 
piety  and  by  my  favorable  assent  he  has  obtained  the  bishop- 
ric of  so  great  a  city.  Let  him  not  disdain  a  royal  city,  which 
he  cannot  make  an  apostolic  see;  and  let  him  on  no  account 
hope  to  be  able  to  rise  by  injury  to  others.  For  the  privileges 
of  the  churches,  determined  by  the  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers, 
and  fixed  by  the  decrees  of  the  Nicene  synod,  cannot  be  over- 
thrown by  an  unscrupulous  act,  nor  disturbed  by  an  innova- 
tion. And  in  the  faithful  execution  of  this  task  by  the  aid  of 
Christ,  it  is  necessary  that  I  show  an  unflinching  devotion; 


THE   ROMAN   CHURCH  479 

for  it  is  a  charge  intrusted  to  me,  and  it  tends  to  condemna- 
tion if  the  rules  sanctioned  by  the  Fathers  and  laid  down 
under  the  guidance  of  God's  spirit  at  the  synod  of  Nicaea  for 
the  government  of  the  whole  Church  are  violated  with  my 
connivance  (which  God  forbid)  and  if  the  wishes  of  a  single 
brother  have  more  weight  with  me  than  the  common  word  of 
the  Lord's  whole  house. 

(c)  Leo  the  Great,  Ep.  105,  ad  Pulcheriam  Augustam  A.  D. 
452.     (MSL,  54:997-) 

Condemnation  of  all  canons  contravening  those  of  Nicaea. 

§  3.  Let  him  [Anatolius]  know  to  what  sort  of  man  he  has 
succeeded,  and,  expelhng  all  the  spirit  of  pride,  let  him  im- 
itate the  faith  of  Flavian,  his  modesty  and  his  humihty,  which 
raised  him  up  even  to  a  confessor's  glory.  If  he  will  shine 
with  his  virtues,  he  will  be  praiseworthy  and  everywhere  he 
will  win  an  abundance  of  love,  not  by  seeking  human  things, 
but  divine  favor.  And  by  this  careful  course  I  promise  that 
my  heart  will  also  be  bound  to  him,  and  the  love  of  this  apos- 
tohc  see  which  we  have  ever  bestowed  upon  the  church  of 
Constantinople  shall  never  be  violated  by  any  change.  Be- 
cause, if  rulers,  lacking  self-restraint,  fall  into  errors,  yet  the 
purity  of  the  churches  of  Christ  continues.  As  for  the  as- 
sents of  bishops  which  are  in  contradiction  with  the  regulations 
of  the  holy  canons  composed  at  Nic^a,  in  conjunction  with 
your  faithful  race  we  do  not  recognize  them,  and  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  blessed  Apostle  Peter  we  absolutely  disannul 
in  comprehensive  terms  in  all  cases  ecclesiastical,  following 
those  laws  which  the  Holy  Ghost  set  forth  by  three  hundred 
and  eighteen  bishops  for  the  pacific  observance  of  all  priests, 
so  that,  even  if  a  much  greater  number  were  to  pass  a  dif- 
ferent decree  from  theirs,  whatever  was  opposed  to  their  con- 
stitution would  have  to  be  held  in  no  respect. 

(d)  Leo  the  Great,  Ep.  106,  ad  Anatolium  A.  D.  452. 
(MSL,  54  :  1005.) 


48o  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

The  relation  of  the  apostoHc  sees  to  Peter. 

Your  purpose  is  in  no  way  whatever  supported  by  the  writ- 
ten assent  of  certain  bishops,  given,  as  you  allege,  sixty  years 
ago,^  and  never  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See  by  your  predecessors;  under  this  project^  which 
from  its  outset  was  tottering  and  has  already  collapsed,  you 
now  wish  to  place  too  late  and  useless  props.  .  .  .  The 
rights  of  provincial  primates  may  not  be  overthrown,  nor 
metropolitan  bishops  be  defrauded  of  privileges  based  on  an- 
tiquity. The  see  of  Alexandria  may  not  lose  any  of  that  dig- 
nity which  it  merited  through  St.  Mark,  the  evangelist  and 
disciple  of  the  blessed  Peter,  nor  may  the  splendor  of  so  great 
a  church  be  obscured  by  another's  clouds,  when  Dioscurus 
fell  through  his  persistence  in  impiety.  The  church  of 
Antioch,  too,  in  which  first,  at  the  preaching  of  the  blessed 
Apostle  Peter,  the  Christian  name  arose,  must  continue  in  the 
position  assigned  to  it  by  the  Fathers,  and,  being  set  in  the 
third  place  [Can.  6,  Nicaea,  325,  z;.  supra,  §  72],  must  never  be 
lowered  therefrom.  For  the  see  is  one  thing,  and  those  who 
preside  in  it  something  different;  and  an  individual's  great 
honor  is  his  own  integrity. 

{e)  Leo  the  Great,  Ep.  6,  ad  Anastasium  A.  D.  444.  (MSL, 
54 :  616.)     C/.  Kirch,  nn.  814  f. 

The  policy  of  centralization.  The  primates  are  representatives  of 
the  bishop  of  Rome.     Anastasius  was  bishop  of  Thessalonica. 

Ch.  2.  Inasmuch,  dear  brother,  as  your  request  has  been 
made  known  to  us  through  our  son  Nicholas,  the  priest,  that 
you  also,  like  your  predecessors,  might  receive  from  us  in  your 
turn  authority  over  Illyricum  for  the  observance  of  the  rules, 
we  give  our  consent,  and  earnestly  exhort  that  no  concealment 
and  no  negligence  may  be  allowed  in  the  management  of  the 
churches  situated  throughout  Illyricum,  which  we  commit  to 

1  Reference  to  the  Council  of  Constantinople,  381,  known  as  the  Second 
General  Council,  but  not  yet  acknowledged  as  such;  see  above,  §  71. 

2  The  elevation  of  the  see  at  Constantinople  to  supremacy  in  the  East. 


THE  ROMAN   CHURCH  481 

you  in  our  stead,  following  the  precedent  of  Siricius,  of  blessed 
memory,  who  then,  for  the  first  time  acting  on  a  fixed  method, 
intrusted  them  to  your  last  predecessor  but  one,  Anysius,  of 
holy  memory,  who  had  at  the  time  well  deserved  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See,  and  was  approved  by  after  events,  that  he  might 
render  assistance  to  the  churches  situated  in  that  province, 
whom  he  wished  to  keep  up  to  the  discipline.  .  .  . 

Ch.  5.  Those  of  the  brethren  who  have  been  summoned 
to  a  synod  should  attend,  and  not  deny  themselves  to  the  holy 
congregation.  .  .  .  But  if  any  more  important  question  spring 
up,  such  as  cannot  be  settled  there  under  your  presidency, 
brother,  send  your  report  and  consult  us,  so  that  we  may 
write  back  under  the  revelation  of  the  Lord,  of  whose  mercy 
it  is  that  we  can  do  aught,  because  He  has  breathed  favor- 
ably upon  us;  that  by  our  decision  we  may  vindicate  our 
right  of  cognizance  in  accordance  with  old-established  tradi- 
tion, and  the  respect  which  is  due  the  Apostolic  See;  for  as 
we  wish  you  to  exercise  your  authority  in  our  stead,  so  we  re- 
serve to  ourselves  points  which  cannot  be  decided  on  the  spot 
and  persons  who  have  appealed  to  us.^ 

CHAPTER  HI.     THE  CHURCH  IN  THE  EASTERN  EMPIRE 

At  the  beginning  of  the  permanent  division  of  the  Empire, 
the  church  life  of  the  East  was  disturbed  by  a  series  of  closely 
connected  disputes  known  as  the  First  Origenistic  Contro- 
versy (§  87),  in  which  were  comprised  a  conflict  between  a 
rationahstic  tendency,  connected  with  the  religious  philosophy 
of  Origen,  and  a  traditionahsm  that  eschewed  speculation,  a 
bitter  rivalry  between  the  great  sees  of  Alexandria,  the  relig- 

^Cf.  Ep.  14,  ad  Anastasium,  written  somewhat  later:  "From  which  model 
[the  difference  in  the  rank  and  order  of  the  Apostles]  has  arisen  a  distinction 
between  bishops  also,  and  by  an  important  ordinance  it  has  been  provided  that 
eveiy  one  should  not  claim  everything  for  himself;  but  that  there  should  be  in 
each  province  one  whose  opinion  should  have  priority  among  the  brethren;  and 
again,  that  certain  whose  appointment  is  in  the  greater  cities  should  undertake 
fuller  responsibility,  through  whom  the  care  of  the  universal  Church  should 
converge  toward  Peter's  one  seat,  and  nothing  anywhere  should  be  separated 
from  its  head." 


482  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

ious  and  intellectual  capital  of  the  East,  and  Constantinople, 
the  church  of  the  new  imperial  city,  and  personal  disputes. 
But  more  serious  controversies  were  already  beginning. 
While  the  Church  of  the  West  was  laying  the  foundations  of 
the  papal  system,  the  Church  of  the  East  was  falhng  more 
and  more  under  the  dominance  of  the  secular  authority;  while 
the  West  was  developing  its  anthropology,  with  its  doctrines  of 
Original  Sin,  Grace,  and  Election,  the  East  was  entering  upon 
the  long  discussion  of  the  topic  which  had  been  left  by  the 
Arian  controversy — granted  that  the  incarnate  Son  of  God 
is  truly  eternal  God,  in  what  way  are  the  divine  and  human 
natures  related  to  the  one  personaHty  of  the  incarnate  God 
(§  88)?  The  controversies  that  arose  over  this  topic  involved 
the  entire  Church  of  the  East,  and  found  in  the  general  coun- 
cils of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431  (§  89),  and  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451 
(§  90),  partial  solutions.  In  the  case  of  each  council,  perma- 
ment  schisms  resulted,  and  large  portions  of  the  Church  of  the 
East  broke  away  from  the  previous  unity  (§  91,);  and  on  ac- 
count of  the  intimate  connection  between  the  affairs  of  the 
Church  and  the  secular  poHcy  of  the  Empire,  a  schism  was 
caused  between  the  see  of  Rome  and  the  churches  in  com- 
munion with  the  see  of  Constantinople. 

§  87.  The  First  Origenistic  Controversy  and  the  Victory 
of  Traditionalism. 

§  88.  The  Chris tological  Problem  and  the  Theological 
Tendencies. 

§  89.  The  Nestorian  Controversy  and  the  Council  of 
Ephesus,  431, 

§  90.  The  Eutychian  Controversy  and  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon,  451. 

§  91.  The  Results  of  Chalcedon  and  the  Rise  of  Schism 
from  the  Monophysite  Controversy. 

§  92.  The  Church  of  Italy  under  the  Ostrogoths  and  dur- 
ing the  first  Schism  between  Rome  and  the  East- 
ern Church. 


THE  FIRST  ORIGENISTIC   CONTROVERSY    483 

§  87.    The  First  Origenistic   Controversy  and  the 
Triumph  of  Traditionalism 

In  the  East  the  leading  theologians  of  the  fourth  century 
were  educated  under  the  influence  of  Origenism;  among  these 
were  Basil  of  Caesarea,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  and  Gregory  of 
Nazianzus.  In  the  West  the  feeling  regarding  Origen  was 
not  so  favorable,  but  the  Western  theologians,  Jerome  and 
Rufinus,  who  were  then  living  in  Palestine,  shared  in  the 
general  admiration  of  Origen.  But  a  series  of  brief  contro- 
versies broke  out  in  which  the  standing  of  Origen  as  an  ortho- 
dox theologian  was  seriously  attacked,  as  well  as  the  whole 
tendency  for  which  he  stood.  The  result  was  a  wide-spread 
condemnation  of  the  spiritualizing  teaching  of  the  great  Alex- 
andrian, and  the  rise  of  what  might  be  called  an  anthropo- 
morphic traditionahsm.  The  first  of  the  three  controversies 
took  place  in  Palestine,  395-399,  and  was  occasioned  by 
Epiphanius  of  Salamis,  a  zealous  opponent  of  heresy.  He 
denounced  Origen  and  induced  Jerome  to  abandon  Origen; 
and  Rufinus  was  soon  in  bitter  enmity  with  Jerome.  The 
second  controversy  took  place  in  Egypt  about  the  same  time, 
when  a  group  of  monks  in  the  Scetic  desert,  who  were  violently 
opposed  to  Origenism,  compelled  Theophilus,  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria and  an  admirer  of  Origen,  to  abandon  that  theologian 
and  to  side  with  them  against  the  monks  of  the  Nitrian  desert, 
who  were  Origenists,  and  to  condemn  Origen  at  a  council  at 
Alexandria,  399.  The  third  controversy  involved  John  Chrys- 
ostom,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  who  had  protected  four 
Nitrian  monks  who  had  fled  to  his  protection.  Theophilus 
seized  the  opportunity  and,  with  the  assistance  for  a  time  of 
Epiphanius,  ultimately  brought  about  the  downfall  of  Chrys- 
ostom,  who  died  deposed  and  in  exile,  404.  No  controversies 
of  the  ancient  Church  are  less  attractive  than  the  Origenistic, 
in  which  so  much  personal  rancor,  selfish  ambition,  mean 
intrigue,  and  so  httle  profound  thought  were  involved.  The 
literature,  therefore,  is  scanty. 


484  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Additional  source  material:  Jerome,  Ep.  86-99  (PNF);  Rufinus  and 
Jerome,  controversial  writings  bearing  on  Origenism  in  PNF,  ser. 
II,  vol.  Ill,  pp.  417-541;  Socrates,  ^w/.  Ec,  VI,  2-21;  Sozomen,  Hist. 
Ec,  VIII,  2-28. 

{a)  Basil,  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  27.     (MSG,  32  :  187.) 

The  force  of  unwritten  tradition. 

The  following  is  the  most  important  and  authoritative  statement  of 
the  force  of  unwritten  tradition  in  the  Eastern  Church.  It  is  referred 
to  by  John  of  Damascus  in  his  defence  of  images  {De  Fide  Ortkod.,  IV, 
16),  cf.  §  109.  It  is  placed  in  the  present  section  as  illustrating  the 
principle  of  traditionalism  which,  in  a  fanatical  form,  brought  about 
the  Origenistic  controversies. 

Of  the  beliefs  and  public  teachings  preserved  in  the  Church, 
some  we  have  from  written  tradition,  others  we  have  re- 
ceived as  deHvered  to  us  "in  a  mystery"  by  the  tradition  of 
the  Apostles;  and  both  of  these  have  in  relation  to  true  piety 
the  same  binding  force.  And  these  no  one  will  gainsay,  at 
least  no  one  who  is  versed  even  moderately  in  the  institutions 
of  the  Church.  For  were  we  to  reject  such  customs  as  are 
unwritten  as  having  no  great  force,  we  should  unintentionally 
injure  the  gospels  in  their  very  vitals;  or,  rather,  reduce  our 
pubHc  definition  to  a  mere  name  and  nothing  more.  For 
example,  to  take  the  first  and  most  general  instance,  who  is 
there  who  has  taught  us  in  writing  to  sign  with  the  cross  those 
who  have  trusted  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ? 
What  writing  has  taught  us  to  turn  to  the  East  in  our  prayers? 
Which  of  the  saints  has  left  us  in  writing  the  words  at  the 
invocation  and  at  the  displaying  of  the  bread  in  the  eucha- 
rist  and  the  cup  of  blessing?  For  we  are  not,  as  is  well  known, 
content  with  what  the  Apostle  or  the  Gospel  has  recorded; 
but,  both  before  and  after,  we  say  other  words  as  having  great 
importance  for  the  mystery,  and  these  we  derive  from  un- 
written teaching.  Moreover,  we  bless  the  water  of  baptism 
and  the  oil  of  chrism,  and,  besides  this,  him  who  is  baptized. 
From  what  writings?  Is  it  not  from  the  silent  and  mystical 
tradition?  What  written  word  teaches  the  anointing  of  oil 
itself?     And  whence  is  it  that  a  man  is  baptized  three  times? 


THE  FIRST  ORIGENISTIC   CONTROVERSY    485 

And  as  to  other  customs  of  baptism,  from  what  Scripture 
comes  the  renunciation  of  Satan  and  his  angels?  Does  not 
this  come  from  the  unpubhshed  and  secret  teaching  which  our 
fathers  guarded  in  silence,  averse  from  curious  meddhng  and 
inquisitive  investigation,  having  learned  the  lesson  that  the 
reverence  of  the  mysteries  is  best  preserved  in  silence?  How 
was  it  proper  to  parade  in  public  the  teaching  of  those  things 
which  it  was  not  permitted  the  uninitiated  to  look  at? 

(b)  Jerome,  Preface  to  the  Vulgate  Translation  oj  the  New 
Testament.     (MSL,  29  :  557.) 

Jerome's  free  critical  attitude  in  his  work  in  his  earlier  life. 
This  preface  is  addressed  to  Bishop  Damasus  of  Rome  and  is  dated 
383. 

You  urge  me  to  make  a  new  work  out  of  an  old  and,  as  it 
were,  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures  already 
scattered  throughout  the  whole  world;  and,  inasmuch  as  they 
differ  among  themselves,  I  am  to  decide  which  of  them  agree 
with  the  Greek  original.  A  pious  labor,  but  a  perilous  pre- 
sumption; to  judge  others,  myself  to  be  judged  of  all;  to 
change  the  language  of  the  aged,  and  to  carry  back  the  world 
already  grown  gray,  back  to  the  beginnings  of  its  infancy! 
Is  there  a  man,  learned  or  unlearned,  who  will  not,  when  he 
takes  the  volume  into  his  hands  and  perceives  that  what  he 
reads  differs  from  the  flavor  which  once  he  tasted,  break  out 
immediately  into  violent  language  and  call  me  a  forger  and  a 
profane  person  for  having  the  audacity  to  add  anything  to 
the  ancient  books  or  to  change  or  correct  anything?  I  am 
consoled  in  two  ways  in  bearing  this  odium :  in  the  first  place, 
that  you,  the  supreme  bishop,  command  it  to  be  done;  and 
secondly,  even  on  the  testimony  of  those  reviHng  us,  what 
varies  cannot  be  true.  For  if  we  put  faith  in  the  Latin  texts, 
let  them  tell  us  which;  for  there  are  almost  as  many  texts 
as  copies.  But  if  the  truth  is  to  be  sought  from  many,  why 
should  we  not  go  back  to  the  orignal  Greek  and  correct  the 
mistakes  introduced  by  inaccurate  translators,  and  the  blun- 


486  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

dering  alterations  of  confident  and  ignorant  men,  and  further, 
all  that  has  been  added  or  altered  by  sleepy  copyists?  I  am 
not  discussing  the  Old  Testament,  which  was  turned  into 
Greek  by  the  Seventy  Elders,  and  has  reached  us  by  a  descent 
of  three  steps.  I  do  not  ask  what  Aquila  and  Symmachus 
think,  or  why  Theodotion  takes  a  middle  course  between  the 
ancients  and  the  moderns.  I  am  wilKng  to  let  that  be  a  true 
translation  which  had  apostolic  approval  [i.  e.,  the  LXX].  I 
am  now  speaking  of  the  New  Testament.  This  was  undoubt- 
edly composed  in  Greek,  with  the  exception  of  the  work  of  the 
Apostle  Matthew,  who  first  published  the  gospel  of  Christ  in 
Judea  and  in  Hebrew.  This  [i.  e.,  the  New  Testament],  as  it 
is  in  our  language,  is  certainly  marked  by  discrepancies,  and 
the  stream  flows  in  different  channels;  it  must  be  sought  in 
one  fountainhead.  I  pass  over  those  manuscripts  bearing 
the  names  of  Lucian  and  Hesychius,  which  a  few  contentious 
persons  perversely  support.  It  was  not  permitted  these  writ- 
ers to  amend  anything  in  the  Old  Testament  after  the  labor 
of  the  Seventy;  and  it  was  useless  to  make  corrections  in  the 
New,  for  translations  of  the  Scriptures  already  made  in  the 
language  of  many  nations  show  that  they  are  additions  and 
false.  Therefore  this  short  preface  promises  only  the  four 
gospels,  of  which  the  order  is  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John, 
revised  by  a  comparison  of  the  Greek  manuscripts  and  only 
of  the  ancient  manuscripts.  And  that  they  might  not  depart 
far  from  the  Latin  customarily  read,  I  have  used  my  pen  with 
some  restraint,  so  that  having  corrected  only  the  passages 
which  seemed  to  change  the  meaning,  I  have  allowed  the  rest 
to  remain  as  it  was. 

ic)  Jerome,  Ep.  7,  ad  Pammachium.     (MSL,  23  :  376.) 

The  principal  errors  of  Origen  according  to  Jerome. 

This  is  the  most  important  work  of  Jerome  in  the  controversy  known 
as  the  Origenistic  controversy.  Jerome  attacks  in  this  work  John, 
bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  writes  as  a  result  of  the  work  of  Epiphanius 
in  Palestine  three  years  before.  The  following  were  addressed  to  John 
to  reject,  as  a  test  of  that  bishop's  orthodoxy.     See  above,  §  43. 


THE  FIRST  ORIGENISTIC   CONTROVERSY     487 

First,  in  the  book  irepl  apxo)v  it  is  said  [I,  1:8]:  ''For  as  it  is 
unfitting  to  say  that  the  Son  can  see  the  Father,  so  it  is  not 
meet  to  think  that  the  Holy  Spirit  can  see  the  Son." 

Secondly,  that  souls  are  bound  in  this  body  as  in  a  prison; 
and  that  before  man  was  made  in  paradise  they  dwelt  among 
rational  creatures  in  the  heavens.  Wherefore,  afterward, 
to  console  itself,  the  soul  says  in  the  Psalms,  "Before  I  was 
humbled  I  went  wrong,"  and  "Return,  my  soul,  unto  thy  rest," 
and  "Lead  my  soul  out  of  prison,"  and  similarly  elsewhere.- 

Thirdly,  that  he  says  that  both  the  devil  and  the  demons 
will  some  time  or  other  repent  and  ultimately  reign  with  the 
saints. 

Fourthly,  that  he  interprets  the  coats  of  skins,  with  which 
Adam  and  Eve  were  clothed  after  their  fall  and  ejection  from 
paradise,  to  be  human  bodies,  and  no  doubt  they  were  pre- 
viously in  paradise  without  flesh,  sinews,  or  bones. 

Fifthly,  he  most  openly  denies  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh, 
the  bodily  structure,  and  the  distinction  of  sexes  by  which  we 
men  are  distinguished  from  women,  both  in  his  explanation 
of  the  first  psalm  and  in  many  other  treatises. 

Sixthly,  he  so  allegorizes  paradise  as  to  destroy  the  truth 
of  history,  understanding  angels  instead  of  trees,  heavenly 
virtues  instead  of  rivers;  and  he  overthrows  all  that  is  con- 
tained in  the  history  of  paradise  by  his  tropological  interpre- 
tation. 

Seventhly,  he  thinks  that  the  waters  which  in  the  Scrip- 
tures are  said  to  be  above  the  heavens  are  holy  and  supernal 
powers;  while  those  which  are  upon  the  earth  and  beneath 
the  earth  are,  on  the  contrary,  demoniacal  powers. 

Eighthly,  that  the  image  and  likeness  of  God,  in  which  man 
was  created,  was  lost  and  was  no  longer  in  man  after  he  was 
expelled  from  paradise. 

(d)  Anastasius,  Ep.  ad  Simplicianum,  in  Jerome,  Ep.  95. 
(MSL,  22  :  772.) 

Condemnation  of  Origen  by  Anastasius,  bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D.  400 


488  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

To  his  lord  and  brother,  Simplicianus,  Anastasius. 

It  is  felt  right  that  a  shepherd  have  great  care  and  watch- 
fulness over  his  flock.  In  like  manner,  also,  the  careful  watch- 
man from  his  lofty  tower  keeps  a  lookout  day  and  night  on 
behalf  of  the  city.  In  the  hour  of  tempest  and  peril  the 
prudent  shipmaster  suffers  great  distress  of  mind  lest  by  the 
tempest  and  the  violent  waves  his  vessel  be  dashed  upon  the 
rocks.  With  similar  feelings  that  reverend  and  honorable 
man  Theophilus,  our  brother  and  fellow-bishop,  ceases  not  to 
watch  over  the  things  which  make  for  salvation,  that  God's 
people  in  the  different  churches  may  not  by  reading  Origen 
run  into  awful  blasphemies. 

Having  been  informed,  then,  by  the  letter  of  the  aforesaid, 
we  inform  your  holiness  that  just  as  we  are  set  in  the  city  of 
Rome,  in  which  the  prince  of  the  Apostles,  the  glorious  Peter, 
founded  the  Church  and  then  by  his  faith  strengthened  it; 
to  the  end  that  no  man  contrary  to  the  commandment  read 
these  books  which  we  have  mentioned  and  the  same  we  have 
condemned;  and  with  earnest  prayers  we  have  urged  that  the 
precepts  of  the  Evangelists  which  God  and  Christ  have  in- 
spired the  Evangehsts  to  teach  ought  not  to  be  forsaken;  but 
that  is  to  be  remembered  which  the  venerable  Apostle  Paul 
preached  by  way  of  warning:  ''If  any  one  preach  a  gospel 
unto  you  other  than  that  which  was  preached  unto  you,  let 
him  be  anathema"  [Gal.  i:8].  Holding  fast,  therefore, 
this  precept,  we  have  intimated  that  everything  written  in 
days  past  by  Origen  that  is  contrary  to  our  faith  is  even  by 
us  rejected  and  condemned. 

We  have  written  these  things  to  your  hoHness  by  the  hand 
of  the  presbyter  Eusebius,  who,  being  a  man  filled  with  a 
glowing  faith  and  having  the  love  of  the  Lord,  has  shown  me 
some  blasphemous  chapters  at  which  we  shuddered  and  which 
we  condemned,  but  if  any  other  things  have  been  put  forth 
by  Origen,  you  should  know  that  with  their  author  they  are 
alike  condemned  by  me.  The  Lord  have  you  in  safe-keep- 
ing, my  lord  and  brother  deservedly  held  in  honor. 


THE  FIRST  ORIGENISTIC   CONTROVERSY    489 

{e)  Rufinus,  Preface  to  Translation  of  Origen^s  "De  Prin- 
cipiisy     (MSL,  22  :  733  and  also  MSG,  11  :  iii.) 

In  this  preface  Rufinus  refers,  without  mentioning  names,  to  Jerome. 
Inasmuch  as  it  was  perfectly  clear  to  whom  the  allusion  was  made,  as 
the  translator  and  admirer  of  Origen,  Jerome  felt  himself  personally- 
attacked  and  retorted  furiously  upon  Rufinus. 

I  know  that  a  great  many  of  the  brethren,  incited  by  their 
desire  for  a  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  have  requested  various 
men  versed  in  Greek  letters  to  make  Origen  a  Roman  and  give 
him  to  Latin  ears.  Among  these  was  our  brother  and  asso- 
ciate [i.  €.,  Jerome],  who  was  so  requested  by  Bishop  Damasus, 
when  he  translated  the  two  homihes  on  the  Song  of  Songs  from 
Greek  into  Latin,  prefixed  to  the  work  a  preface  so  full  of 
beauty  and  so  magnificent  that  he  awoke  in  every  one  the 
desire  of  reading  Origen  and  of  eagerly  examining  his  works, 
and  he  said  that  to  the  soul  of  that  man  the  words  might  well 
be  applied,  ''The  King  has  brought  me  into  his  chamber" 
[Cant.  2:4],  and  he  declared  that  Origen  in  his  other  books 
surpassed  all  other  men,  but  in  this  had  surpassed  himself. 
What  he  promised  in  his  preface  is,  indeed,  that  he  would 
give  to  Roman  ears  not  only  these  books  on  the  Song  of  Songs, 
but  many  others  of  Origen.  But,  as  I  perceive,  he  is  so  pleased 
with  his  own  style  that  he  pursues  an  object  bringing  him  more 
glory,  viz.,  to  be  the  father  of  a  book  rather  than  a  translator. 
I  am  therefore  following  out  a  task  begun  by  him  and  com- 
mended by  him.  ...  In  translation,  I  follow  as  far  as  pos- 
sible the  method  of  my  predecessors,  and  especially  of  him 
whom  I  have  already  mentioned,  who,  after  he  had  trans- 
lated into  Latin  above  seventy  of  the  books  of  Origen,  which 
he  called  Homihes,  and  also  a  certain  number  of  the  tomes 
written  on  the  Apostle  [the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul],  since  a  num- 
ber of  offensive  passages  are  to  be  found  in  the  Greek,  elim- 
inated and  purged,  in  his  translation,  all  of  them,  so  that  the 
Latin  reader  will  find  nothing  in  these  which  jar  on  our  faith. 
Him,  therefore,  we  follow,  not  indeed  with  the  power  of  his 
eloquence,  but  as  far  as  we  can  in  his  rules  and  methods; 


490  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

that  is,  taking  care  not  to  promulgate  those  things  which  in 
the  books  of  Origen  are  found  to  be  discrepant  and  contra- 
dictory one  to  the  other.  The  cause  of  these  variations  I 
have  set  forth  fully  in  the  apology  which  Pamphilus  wrote 
for  the  books  of  Origen,  to  which  is  appended  a  short  treatise 
showing  how  proofs  which,  as  I  judge,  are  quite  clear  in  his 
books  have  in  many  cases  been  falsified  by  heretical  and  evil- 
disposed  persons. 

(J)  Augustine,  Ep.  73,  Ch.  8.     (MSL,  33  :  249.J 

The  attempt  of  Augustine  to  bring  about  a  reconciliation  between 
Rufinus  and  Jerome.  Jerome  had  written  some  affectionate  words  to 
Augustine  to  which  he  alludes  in  the  beginning  of  the  following  passage: 

When,  by  these  words,  now  not  only  yours  but  also  mine, 
I  am  gladdened  and  refreshed,  and  when  I  am  comforted  not 
a  little  by  the  desire  of  both  of  us  for  mutual  fellowship,  which 
has  been  suspended  and  is  not  satisfied,  suddenly  I  am  pierced 
through  by  the  darts  of  keenest  sorrow  when  I  consider  that 
between  you  [i.  e.,  Rufinus  and  Jerome]  (to  whom  God  granted 
in  fullest  measure  and  for  a  long  time  that  which  both  of  us 
have  longed  for,  that  in  closest  and  most  intimate  fellowship 
you  tasted  together  the  honey  of  Holy  Scriptures)  such  a 
blight  of  bitterness  has  broken  out,  when,  where,  and  in  whom 
it  was  not  to  be  feared,  since  it  has  befallen  you  at  the  very 
time  when,  unencumbered,  having  cast  away  secular  bur- 
dens, you  were  following  the  Lord,  were  living  together  in 
that  land  in  which  the  Lord  walked  with  human  feet,  when 
He  said,  "Peace  I  leave  with  you,  My  peace  I  give  unto  you"; 
being,  moreover,  men  of  mature  age,  whose  life  was  devoted 
to  the  study  of  the  word  of  God.  Truly,  "man's  life  on  earth 
is  a  period  of  trial"  [Job  7:1].  Alas,  that  I  cannot  meet 
you  both  together,  perchance  that  in  agitation,  grief,  and  fear 
I  might  cast  myself  at  your  feet,  weep  till  I  could  weep  no 
more,  and  appeal  as  I  love  you,  first  to  each  of  you  for  his 
own  sake,  and  then  for  the  sake  of  those,  especially  the  weak, 
"for  whom  Christ  died"  [I  Cor.  8:11],  who  to  their  great 


THE  FIRST  ORIGENISTIC  CONTROVERSY    491 

peril  look  on  you  as  on  the  stage  of  time,  imploring  you  not 
to  scatter  abroad,  in  writing,  those  things  about  each  other 
which  when  reconciled,  you,  who  are  now  unwilHng  to  be 
reconciled,  could  not  then  destroy,  and  which  when  reconciled 
you  would  not  dare  to  read  lest  you  should  quarrel  anew. 

(g)  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  VI,  15.     (MSG,  67  :  708.) 

The  fall  of  Chrysostom. 

Epiphanius  had  gone  to  Constantinople  on  the  suggestion  of  The- 
ophilus,  and  there,  in  his  zeal,  had  violated  the  canons  of  ordination 
as  generally  received.  In  this  case  he  had  ordained  priests  in  the 
diocese  of  Chrysostom  and  without  his  permission.  Other  troubles 
had  arisen.  On  being  called  to  account  for  his  conduct  by  Chrysostom, 
Epiphanius  hastily  left  the  city,  and  died  on  the  voyage  back  to  his 
diocese,  Salamis,  in  Cyprus. 

When  Epiphanius  had  gone  John  was  informed  by  some 
person  that  the  Empress  Eudoxia  had  set  Epiphanius 
against  him.  Being  of  a  fiery  temperament  and  of  ready 
utterance,  he  soon  after  pronounced  to  the  public  an  invective 
against  women  in  general.  The  people  readily  took  this  as 
uttered  indirectly  against  the  Empress,  and  so  the  speech, 
laid  hold  of  by  evil-disposed  persons,  was  brought  to  the 
knowledge  of  those  in  authority.  At  length  the  Empress, 
having  been  informed  of  it,  immediately  complained  to  her 
husband  of  the  insult  offered  her,  saying  that  the  insult 
offered  her  was  an  insult  to  him.  He  therefore  gave  orders 
that  Theophilus  should  speedily  convoke  a  synod  against  John; 
Severianus  also  co-operated  in  promoting  this,  for  he  still 
retained  his  grudge  \i.  e.,  against  Chrysostom.  See  DCB, 
art.  ''Severianus,  bishop  of  Gabala. "].  No  great  length  of 
time,  accordingly,  intervened  before  Theophilus  arrived,  hav- 
ing stirred  up  many  bishops  from  different  cities;  but  this, 
also,  the  summons  of  the  Emperor  had  commanded.  Espe- 
cially did  they  assemble  who  had  one  cause  or  another  of  com- 
plaint against  John,  and  there  were  present  besides  those 
whom  John  had  deposed,  for  John  had  deposed  many  bishops 
in  Asia  when  he  went  to  Ephesus  for  the  ordination  of  Hera- 


492  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

elides.  Accordingly  they  all,  by  previous  agreement,  assem- 
bled at  Chalcedon  in  Bithynia.  .  .  .  Now  none  of  the  clergy 
[i.  e.,  of  Constantinople]  would  go  forth  to  meet  Theophilus 
or  pay  him  the  customary  honors  because  he  was  openly 
known  as  John's  enemy.  But  the  Alexandrian  sailors — for 
it  happened  that  at  that  time  the  grain-transport  ships  were 
there — ^on  meeting  him,  greeted  him  with  joyful  acclamations. 
He  excused  himself  from  entering  the  church,  and  took  up  his 
abode  at  one  of  the  imperial  mansions  called  ''The  Placidian." 
Then,  in  consequence  of  this,  many  accusations  began  to  be 
poured  forth  against  John,  and  no  longer  was  there  any  men- 
tion of  the  books  of  Origen,  but  all  were  intent  on  pressing 
a  variety  of  absurd  accusations.  When  these  preliminary 
matters  were  settled  the  bishops  were  convened  in  one  of  the 
suburbs  of  Chalcedon,  which  is  called  "The  Oak,"  and  imme- 
diately cited  John  to  answer  charges  which  were  brought 
against  him.  .  .  .  And  since  John,  taking  exception  to  those 
who  cited  him,  on  the  ground  that  they  were  his  enemies, 
demanded  a  general  council,  without  delay  they  repeated  their 
citation  four  times;  and  as  he  persisted  in  his  refusal  to 
answer,  always  giving  the  same  reply,  they  condemned  him, 
and  deposed  him  without  giving  any  other  cause  for  his  depo- 
sition than  that  he  refused  to  obey  when  summoned.  This, 
being  announced  toward  evening,  incited  the  people  to  a  very 
great  sedition,  insomuch  that  they  kept  watch  all  night  and 
would  by  no  means  suffer  him  to  be  removed  from  the  church, 
but  cried  out  that  the  charges  against  him  ought  to  be  deter- 
mined by  a  larger  assembly.  A  decree  of  the  Emperor,  how- 
ever, commanded  that  he  should  be  immediately  expelled 
and  sent  into  exile.  When  John  knew  this  he  voluntarily 
surrendered  himself  about  noon,  unknown  to  the  populace,  on 
the  third  day  after  his  condemnation;  for  he  dreaded  any 
insurrectionary  movement  on  his  account,  and  he  was  ac- 
cordingly led  away. 

(h)  Theophilus  of  Alexandria,  Ep.  ad  Hieronymum,  in  Je- 
rome, Ep.  113.     (MSL,  22  :  932.) 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEM  493 

Theophilus  on  the  fall  of  Chrysostom. 

To  the  well-beloved  and  most  loving  brother  Jerome,  The- 
ophilus sends  greeting  in  the  Lord. 

At  the  outset  the  verdict  of  truth  satisfies  but  few;  but 
the  Lord,  speaking  by  the  prophet,  says,  ''My  judgment 
goeth  forth  as  the  light,"  and  they  who  are  surrounded  with 
a  horror  of  darkness  do  not  with  clear  mind  perceive  the 
nature  of  things,  and  they  are  covered  with  eternal  shame 
and  know  by  their  outcome  that  their  efforts  have  been  in 
vain.  Wherefore  we  also  have  always  desired  that  John 
[Chrysostom],  who  for  a  time  ruled  the  church  of  Constanti- 
nople, might  please  God,  and  we  have  been  unwilling  to  ac- 
cept as  facts  the  cause  of  his  ruin  in  which  he  behaved  him- 
self rashly.  But  not  to  speak  of  his  other  misdeed,  he  has 
by  taking  the  Origenists  into  his  confidences,^  by  advancing 
many  of  them  to  the  priesthood,  and  by  this  crime  saddening 
with  no  slight  grief  that  man  of  God,  Epiphanius,  of  blessed 
memory,  who  has  shone  throughout  all  the  world  a  bright 
star  among  bishops,  deserved  to  hear  the  words,  "Babylon 
is  fallen,  is  fallen." 

§  88.    The  Christological  Problem  and  the  Theolog- 
ical Tendencies 

The  Arian  controversy  in  bringing  about  the  affirmation 
of  the  true  deity  of  the  Son,  or  Logos,  left  the  Church  with  the 
problem  of  the  unity  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in  the 
personahty  of  Jesus.  It  seemed  to  not  a  few  that  to  com- 
bine perfect  deity  with  perfect  humanity  would  result  in  two 
personahties.  Holding  fast,  therefore,  to  the  reality  of  the 
human  nature,  a  solution  was  attempted  by  Apollinarius,  or 
Apollinaris,  by  making  the  divine  Logos  take  the  place  of  the 
human  logos  or  reason.  Mankind  consisted  of  three  parts: 
a  body,  an  animal  soul,  and  a  rational  spirit.  The  Logos 
was  thus  united  to  humanity  by  substituting  the  divine  for 

^  This  probably  refers  to  "the  four  long  brothers." 


494  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

the  human  logos.  But  this  did  violence  to  the  integrity  of 
the  human  nature  of  Christ.  This  attempt  on  the  part  of 
Apolhnaris  was  rejected  at  Constantinople,  but  also  by  the 
Church  generally.     The  human  natures  must  be  complete  if 

I  human  nature  was  deified  by  the  assumption  of  man  in  the 
incarnation.  On  this  basis  two  tendencies  showed  themselves 
quite  early:  the  human  nature  might  be  lost  in  the  divinity, 

n  or  the  human  and  the  divine  natures  might  be  kept  distinct 
and  parallel  or  in  such  a  way  that  certain  acts  might  be  as- 
signed to  the  divine  and  certain  to  the  human  nature.  The 
former  line  of  thought,  adopted  by  the  Cappadocians,  tended 
toward  the  position  assumed  by  Cyril  of  Alexandria  and  in 
a  more  extreme  form  by  the  Monophysites.  The  latter  line 
of  thought  tended  toward  what  was  regarded  as  the  position 
of  Nestorius.  In  this  position  there  was  such  a  sharp  cleav- 
age between  the  divine  and  the  human  natures  as  apparently 
to  create  a  double  personality  in  the  incarnate  Son.  This 
divergence  of  theological  statement  gave  rise  to  the  chris- 
tological  controversies  which  continued  in  various  forms 
through  several  centuries  in  the  East,  and  have  reappeared 
in  various  disguises  in  the  course  of  the  Church's  theological 
development. 

Additional  source  material:  There  are  several  exegetical  works  of 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  available  in  English,  see  Bardenhewer,  §  77,  also 
a  German  translation  of  three  treatises  bearing  on  christology  in  the 
Kempt  en  Bibliothek  der  Kirchcnvdter ,  1879.  For  the  general  point 
of  view  of  the  Cappadocians  and  the  relation  of  the  incarnation  to 
redemption,  see  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  The  Great  Catechism  (PNF,  ser.  II, 
vol.  V),  V.  infra,  §  89  and  references  in  Seeberg,  §  23. 

(a)  Apollinaris,  Fragments.     Ed.  H.  Lietzmann. 

His  Christology. 

The  following  fragments  of  the  teaching  of  Apollinaris  are  from  H. 
Lietzmann,  A  pollinaris  von  Laodicea  und  seine  Schule.  Texte  und  Unter- 
suchungen,  1904.  Many  fragments  are  to  be  found  in  the  Dialogues 
which  Theodoret  wrote  against  Eutychianism,  which  he  traced  to  the 
teaching  of  Apolhnaris.  The  first  condemnation  of  Apollinaris  was 
at  Rome,  377,  see  Hefele,  §  91;  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  10,  gives  the 
letter  of  Damasus  issued  in  the  name  of  the  synod. 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL   PROBLEM  495 

P.  224  [81].  If  God  had  been  joined  with  a  man,  one  com- 
plete being  with  another  complete  being,  there  would  be  two 
sons  of  God,  one  Son  of  God  by  nature,  another  through 
adoption. 

P.  247  [150].  They  who  assume  a  twofold  spirit  in  Christ 
pull  a  stone  out  with  their  finger.  For  if  each  is  independent 
and  impelled  by  its  own  natural  will,  it  is  impossible  that  in 
one  and  the  same  subject  the  two  can  be  together,  who  will 
what  is  opposed  to  each  other;  for  each  works  what  is  willed 
by  it  according  to  its  own  proper  and  personal  motives. 

P.  248  [152].  They  who  speak  of  one  Christ,  and  assert 
that  there  are  two  independent  spiritual  natures  in  Him,  do 
not  know  Him  as  the  Logos  made  flesh,  who  has  remained  in 
His  natural  unity,  for  they  represent  Him  as  divided  into  two 
unHke  natures  and  modes  of  operation. 

P.  239  [129].  If  a  man  has  soul  and  body,  and  both  re- 
main distinguished  in  unity,  how  much  more  has  Christ,  who 
joins  His  divine  being  with  a  body,  both  as  a  permanent  pos- 
session without  any  commingling  one  with  the  other? 

P.  209  [21,  22].  The  Logos  became  flesh,  but  the  flesh 
was  not  without  a  soul,  for  it  is  said  that  it  strives  against  the 
spirit  and  opposes  the  law  of  the  understanding.  [In  this 
Apollinaris  takes  up  the  trichotomy  of  human  nature,  a  view 
which  he  did  not  apparently  hold  at  the  beginning  of  his 
teaching.] 

P.  240  [137].  John  [John  2  :  19]  spoke  of  the  destroyed 
temple,  that  is,  of  the  body  of  Him  who  would  raise  it  up 
again.  The  body  is  altogether  one  with  Him.  But  if  the 
body  of  the  Lord  has  become  one  with  the  Lord,  then  the 
characteristics  of  the  body  are  proved  to  be  characteristics 
of  Him  on  account  of  the  body. 

(b)  Apollinaris,  Letter  to  the  Emperor  Jovian.     Lietzmann, 

250/- 

We  confess  the  Son  of  God  who  was  begotten  eternally 
before  all  times,  but  in  the  last  times  was  for  our  salvation 


496  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

born  of  Mary  according  to  the  flesh;  .  .  .  and  we  confess  that 
the  same  is  the  Son  of  God  and  God  according  to  the  spirit, 
Son  of  man  according  to  the  flesh;  we  do  not  speak  of  two 
natures  in  the  one  Son,  of  which  one  is  to  be  worshipped  and 
one  is  not  to  be  worshipped,  but  of  only  one  nature  of  the 
Logos  of  God,  which  has  become  flesh  and  with  His  flesh  is 
worshipped  with  one  worship;  and  we  confess  not  two  sons, 
one  who  is  truly  God's  Son  to  be  worshipped  and  another  the 
man — who  is  of  Mary  and  is  not  to  be  worshipped,  who  by  the 
power  of  grace  had  become  the  Son  of  God,  as  is  also  the  case 
with  men,  but  one  Son  of  God  who  at  the  same  time  was  born 
of  Mary  according  to  the  flesh  in  the  last  days,  as  the  angel 
answered  the  Theo tokos  Mary  who  asked,  ''How  shall  this 
be?" — ''The  Holy  Ghost  will  come  upon  thee."  He,  accord- 
ingly, who  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  was  Son  of  God  by 
nature  and  truly  God  .  .  .  only  according  to  the  flesh  from 
Mary  was  He  man,  but  at  the  same  time,  according  to  the 
spirit,  Son  of  God;  and  God  has  in  His  own  flesh  suffered  our 
sorrows. 

(c)  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Ep.  I  ad  Cledonium.  (MSG, 
37:181.) 

In  this  epistle  Gregory  attacks  Apollinaris,  basing  his  argument  on 
the  notion  of  salvation  by  incarnation,  which  formed  the  foundation 
of  the  most  characteristic  piety  of  the  East,  had  been  used  as  a  major 
premise  by  Athanasius  in  opposition  to  Arianism,  and  runs  back  to 
Irenseus  and  the  Asia  Minor  school;  see  above,  §  ss- 

If  any  one  trusted  in  a  man  without  a  human  mind,  he  is 
himself  really  bereft  of  mind  and  quite  unworthy  of  salva- 
tion. For  what  has  not  been  assumed  has  not  been  healed; 
but  what  has  been  united  to  God  is  saved.  If  only  half  of 
Adam  fell,  then  that  which  is  assumed  and  saved  may  be  half 
also;  but  if  the  whole,  it  must  be  united  to  the  whole  of  Him 
that  was  begotten  and  be  saved  as  a  whole.  Let  them  not, 
then,  begrudge  us  our  complete  salvation,  or  clothe  the  Sa- 
viour only  with  bones  and  nerves  and  the  semblance  of  hu- 
manity.    For  if  His  manhood  is  without  soul  [aylrvxo^],  even 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEM  497 

the  Arians  admit  this,  that  they  may  attribute  His  passion 
to  the  godhead,  as  that  which  gives  motion  to  the  body  is  also 
that  which  suffers.  But  if  He  had  a  soul  and  yet  is  without 
a  mind,  how  is  He  a  man,  for  man  is  not  a  mindless  [amvv]  ani- 
mal? And  this  would  necessarily  involve  that  His  form  was 
human,  and  also  His  tabernacle,  but  His  soul  was  that  of  a 
horse,  or  an  ox,  or  some  other  creature  without  mind.  This, 
then,  would  be  what  is  saved,  and  I  have  been  deceived  in  the 
Truth,  and  have  been  boasting  an  honor  when  it  was  another 
who  was  honored.  But  if  His  manhood  is  intellectual  and  not 
without  mind,  let  them  cease  to  be  thus  really  mindless. 

But,  says  some  one,  the  godhead  was  sufficient  in  place  of 
the  human  intellect.  What,  then,  is  this  to  me?  For  god- 
head with  flesh  alone  is  not  man,  nor  with  soul  alone,  nor  with 
both  apart  from  mind,  which  is  the  most  essential  part  of 
man.  Keep,  then,  the  whole  man,  and  mingle  godhead  there- 
with, that  you  may  benefit  me  in  my  completeness.  But,  as 
he  asserts  [i.  e.,  Apollinaris],  He  could  not  contain  two  perfect 
natures.  Not  if  you  only  regard  Him  in  a  bodily  fashion. 
For  a  bushel  measure  will  not  hold  two  bushels,  nor  will  the 
space  of  one  body  hold  two  or  more  bodies.  But  if  you  will 
look  at  what  is  mental  and  incorporeal,  remember  that  I  my- 
self can  contain  soul  and  reason  and  mind  and  the  Holy  Spirit; 
and  before  me  this  world,  by  which  I  mean  the  system  of 
things  visible  and  invisible,  contained  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost.  For  such  is  the  nature  of  intellectual  existences  that 
they  can  mingle  with  one  another  and  with  bodies,  incorpo- 
really  and  invisibly.  .  .  . 

Further,  let  us  see  what  is  their  account  of  the  assumption 
of  the  manhood,  or  the  assumption  of  the  flesh,  as  they  call 
it.  If  it  was  in  order  that  God,  otherwise  incomprehensible, 
might  be  comprehended,  and  might  converse  with  men  through 
His  flesh  as  through  a  veil,  their  mask  is  a  pretty  one,  a  hypo- 
critical fable;  for  it  was  open  to  Him  to  converse  with  us  in 
many  other  ways,  as  in  the  burning  bush  [Ex.  3  :  2]  and  in 
the  appearance  of  a  man  [Gen.  18  :  $].    But  if  it  was  that  He 


498  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

might  destroy  the  condemnation  of  sin  by  sanctifying  like 
by  like,  then  as  He  needed  flesh  for  the  sake  of  the  condemned 
flesh  and  soul  for  the  sake  of  the  soul,  so  also  He  needed 
mind  for  the  sake  of  mind,  which  not  only  fell  in  Adam  but 
was  first  to  be  affected,  as 'physicians  say,  of  the  illness.  For 
that  which  received  the  commandment  was  that  which  failed 
to  observe  the  commandment,  and  that  which  failed  to  ob- 
serve the  commandment  was  that  also  which  dared  to  trans- 
gress, and  that  which  transgressed  was  that  which  stood  most 
in  need  of  salvation,  and  that  which  needed  salvation  was  that 
which  also  was  assumed.  Therefore  mind  was  taken  upon  Him. 

{d)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  382,  Epistula  Synod- 
tea.      Hefele,  §  98. 

Condemnation  of  Apollinarianism. 

At  the  Council  of  Constantinople  held  the  year  after  that  which  is 
known  as  the  Second  General  Council,  and  attended  by  nearly  the  same 
bishops,  there  was  an  express  condemnation  of  Apollinaris  and  his 
doctrine,  for  though  Apollinaris  had  been  condemned  in  381,  the 
point  of  doctrine  was  not  stated.  The  synodical  letter  of  the  coun- 
cil of  382  is  preserved  only  in  part  in  Theodoret,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  9,  who 
concludes  his  account  with  these  words: 

Similarly  they  openly  condemn  the  innovation  of  Apolli- 
narius  [so  Theodoret  writes  the  name]  in  the  phrase,  "And  we 
preserve  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Lord,  holding 
the  tradition  that  the  dispensation  of  the  flesh  is  neither  soul- 
less, nor  mindless,  nor  imperfect." 

(e)  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Creed.    Hahn,  §  215. 

The  position  of  the  Nestorians. 

The  following  extracts  are  from  the  creed  which  was  presented  at 
the  Council  of  Ephesus,  431,  and  was  written  by  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia, the  greatest  theologian  of  the  party  which  stood  with  Nes- 
torius.  Although  it  does  not  state  the  whole  doctrine  of  Theodore, 
yet  its  historical  position  is  so  important  that  its  characteristic  pas- 
sages belong  in  the  present  connection.  Bibliographical  and  critical 
notes  in  Hahn,  loc.  cit. 

Concerning  the  dispensation  which  the  Lord  God  accom- 
plished for  our  salvation  in  the  dispensation  according  to  the 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEM  499 

Lord  Christ,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  know  that  the  Lord  God 
the  Logos  assumed  a  complete  man,  who  was  of  the  seed  of 
Abraham  and  David,  according  to  the  statement  of  the  divine 
Scriptures,  and  was  according  to  nature  whatsoever  they  were 
of  whose  seed  He  was,  a  perfect  man  according  to  nature, 
consisting  of  reasonable  soul  and  human  flesh,  and  the  man 
who  was  as  to  nature  as  we  are,  formed  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin,  born  of  a  woman,  born 
under  the  law,  that  he  might  redeem  us  all  from  the  bondage 
of  the  law  [Gal.  4  : 4]  who  receive  the  adoption  of  sonship 
which  was  long  before  ordained,  that  man  He  joined  to  him- 
self in  an  ineffable  manner.  .  .  . 

And  we  do  not  say  that  there  are  two  Sons  or  two  Lords,  be- 
cause there  is  one  God  [Son?]  according  to  substance,  God  the 
Word,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  the  Father,  and  He  who  has 
been  joined  with  Him  is  a  participator  in  His  deity  and  shares 
in  the  name  and  honor  of  the  Son ;  and  the  Lord  according  to 
essence  is  God  the  Word,  with  whom  that  which  is  joined 
shares  in  honor.  And  therefore  we  say  neither  two  Sons 
nor  two  Lords,  because  one  is  He  who  has  an  inseparable 
conjunction  with  Himself  of  Him  who  according  to  essence 
is  Lord  and  Son,  who,  having  been  assumed  for  our  salvation, 
is  with  Him  received  as  well  in  the  name  as  in  the  honor  of 
both  Son  and  Lord,  not  as  each  one  of  us  individually  is  a 
son  of  God  (wherefore  also  we  are  called  many  sons  of  God, 
according  to  the  blessed  Paul),  but  He  alone  in  an  unique 
manner  having  this,  namely,  in  that  He  was  joined  to  God 
the  Word,  participating  in  the  Sonship  and  dignity,  takes 
away  every  thought  of  two  Sons  or  two  Lords,  and  offers 
indeed  to  us  in  conjunction  with  the  God  the  Word,  to  have 
all  faith  in  Him  and  all  understanding  and  contemplation, 
on  account  of  which  things  also  He  receives  from  every 
creature  the  worship  and  sacrifice  of  God.  Therefore  we  say 
that  there  is  one  Lord,  namely,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by 
whom  all  things  were  made,  understanding  principally  God 
the  Word,  who  according  to  substance  is  Son  of  God  and 


500  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Lord,  equally  regarding  that  which  was  assumed,  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  who  God  anointed  with  the  Spirit  and  power,  as  in 
conjunction  with  God  the  Lord,  and  participating  in  son- 
ship  and  dignity,  who  also  is  called  the  second  Adam,  ac- 
cording to  the  blessed  Apostle  Paul,  as  being  of  the  same 
nature  as  Adam. 

(/■)  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Fragments.    Swete,  Theodori 

epis.  Mops,  in  epistulas  h.  Pauli  commentarii,   Cambridge, 

1880,  1882. 

In  the  appendix  to  the  second  volume  of  this  work  by  Theodore 
there  are  many  fragments  of  Theodore's  principal  dogmatic  work,  Ow 
the  Incarnation,  directed  against  Eunomius.  The  work  as  a  whole  has 
not  been  preserved.  In  the  same  appendix  there  are  also  other  impor- 
tant fragments.     The  references  are  to  this  edition. 

P.  299.  If  we  distinguish  the  two  natures,  we  speak  of  one 
complete  nature  of  God  the  Word  and  a  complete  person 
(TrpoacoTrov) .  But  we  name  complete  also  the  nature  of  the 
man  and  also  the  person.  If  we  think  on  the  conjunction 
(crvvd(l)eLa)  then  we  speak  of  one  person. 

P.  312.  In  the  moment  in  which  He  [Jesus]  was  formed 
[in  the  womb  of  the  Virgin]  He  received  the  destination  of 
being  a  temple  of  God.  For  we  should  not  beheve  that  God 
was  born  of  the  Virgin  unless  we  are  willing  to  assume  that 
one  and  the  same  is  that  which  is  born  and  what  is  in  that 
which  is  born,  the  temple,  and  God  the  Logos  in  the  temple. 
...  If  God  had  become  flesh,  how  could  He  who  was  born 
be  named  God  from  God  [cf.  Nicene  Creed],  and  of  one  be- 
ing with  the  Father?  for  the  flesh  does  not  admit  of  such  a 
designation. 

P.  314.  The  Logos  was  always  in  Jesus,  also  by  His  birth 
and  when  He  was  in  the  womb,  at  the  first  moment  of  his  be- 
ginning; to  His  development  He  gave  the  rule  and  measure, 
and  led  Him  from  step  to  step  to  perfection. 

P.  310.  If  it  is  asked,  did  Mary  bear  a  man,  or  is  she 
the  bearer  of  God  [Theo tokos],  we  can  say  that  both  statements 
are  true.     One  is  true  according  to  the  nature  of  the  case; 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEM  501 

the  other  only  relatively.  She  bore  a  man  according  to 
nature,  for  He  was  a  man  who  was  in  the  womb  of  Mary. 
.  .  .  She  is  Theotokos,  since  God  was  in  the  man  who  was 
born;  not  enclosed  in  Him  according  to  nature,  but  was  in 
Him  according  to  the  relation  of  His  will. 

(g)  Nestorius,  Fragments.     Loofs,  Nestoriana. 

The  fragments  of  Nestorius  have  been  collected  by  Loofs,  Nestori- 
ana, Halle,  1905;  to  this  work  the  references  are  made.  It  now  ap- 
pears that  what  was  condemned  as  Nestorianism  was  a  perversion  of 
his  teaching  and  that  Nestorius  was  himself  in  harmony  with  the 
definition  which  was  put  forth  at  Chalcedon,  a  council  which  he  sur- 
vived and  regarded  as  a  vindication  of  his  position  after  the  wrong 
done  him  at  Ephesus  by  Cyril;  cf.  Bethune-Baker,  Nestorius  and  His 
Teaching,  Cambridge,  1908. 

P.  252.  Is  Paul  a  liar  when  he  speaks  of  the  godhead  of 
Christ  and  says:  ''Without  father,  without  mother,  without 
genealogy"?  My  good  friend,  Mary  has  not  born  the  god- 
head, for  that  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh.  ...  A 
creature  has  not  born  the  Creator,  but  she  bore  a  man,  the 
organ  of  divinity;  the  Holy  Ghost  did  not  create  God  the 
Word,  but  with  that  which  was  bom  of  the  Virgin  He  pre- 
pared for  God  the  Word,  a  temple,  in  which  He  should  dwell. 

P.  177.  Whenever  the  Holy  Scriptures  make  mention  of 
the  works  of  salvation  prepared  by  the  Lord,  they  speak  of 
the  birth  and  suffering,  not  of  the  divinity  but  of  the  human- 
ity of  Christ;  therefore,  according  to  a  more  exact  expression 
the  holy  Virgin  is  named  the  bearer  of  Christ  [Chris totokos]. 

P.  167.  If  any  one  will  bring  forward  the  designation, 
"Theotokos,"  because  the  humanity  that  was  born  was  con- 
joined with  the  Word,  not  because  of  her  who  bore,  so  we  say 
that,  although  the  name  is  not  appropriate  to  her  who  bore, 
for  the  actual  mother  must  be  of  the  same  substance  as  her 
child,  yet  it  can  be  endured  in  consideration  of  the  fact  that 
the  temple,  which  is  inseparably  united  with  God  the  Word, 
comes  of  her. 

P.  196.     Each  nature  must  retain  its  pecuhar  attributes, 


502  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

and  so  we  must,  in  regard  to  the  union,  wonderful  and  exalted 
far  above  all  understanding,  think  of  one  honor  and  confess 
one  Son.  .  .  .  With  the  one  name  Christ  we  designate  at 
the  same  time  two  natures.  .  .  .  The  essential  characteris- 
tics in  the  nature  of  the  divinity  and  in  the  humanity  are 
from  all  eternity  distinguished. 

P.  275.  God  the  Word  is  also  named  Christ  because  He 
has  always  conjunction  with  Christ.  And  it  is  impossible 
for  God  the  Word  to  do  anything  without  the  humanity,  for 
all  is  planned  upon  an  intimate  conjunction,  not  on  the  deifi- 
cation of  the  humanity. 

(//)  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Contra  Eunomium,  V,  5.  (MSG, 
45  •  705-) 

The  Christology  of  the  Cappadocians. 

The  Cappadocians  use  language  which  was  afterward  condemned 
when  given  its  extreme  Alexandrian  interpretation.  Hefele,  §  127, 
may  be  consulted  with  profit. 

The  flesh  is  not  identical  with  the  godhead  before  this 
is  transformed  into  the  godhead,  so  that  necessarily  some 
things  are  appropriate  to  God  the  Word,  other  things  to  the 
form  of  a  servant.  If,  then,  he  [Eunomius]  does  not  reproach 
himself  with  a  duality  of  Words,  on  account  of  such  confu- 
sion, why  are  we  slanderously  charged  with  dividing  the  faith 
into  two  Christs,  we  who  say  that  He  who  was  highly  exalted 
after  His  passion,  was  made  Lord  and  Christ  by  His  union 
with  Him  who  is  verily  Lord  and  Christ,  knowing  by  what  we 
have  learned  that  the  divine  nature  is  always  one  and  the 
same  mode  of  existence,  while  the  flesh  in  itself  is  that  which 
reason  and  sense  apprehend  concerning  it,  but  when  mixed 
with  the  divine  it  no  longer  remains  in  its  own  limitations 
and  properties,  but  is  taken  up  to  that  which  is  overwhelm- 
ing and  transcendent.  Our  contemplation,  however,  of  the 
respective  properties  of  the  flesh  and  of  the  godhead  remains 
free  from  confusion,  so  long  as  each  of  these  is  considered  in 
itself,  as,  for  example,  "The  Word  was  before  the  ages,  but 


THE   CHRISTOLOGICAL  PROBLEM  503 

flesh  came  into  being  in  the  last  times."  ...  It  is  not  the 
human  nature  that  raises  up  Lazarus,  nor  is  it  the  power  that 
cannot  suffer  that  weeps  for  him  when  he  Kes  in  the  grave; 
the  tear  proceeds  from  the  man,  the  life  from  the  true  Life. 
...  So  much  as  this  is  clear  .  .  .  that  the  blows  belong  to 
the  servant  in  whom  the  Lord  was,  the  honors  to  the  Lord, 
whom  the  servant  compassed  about,  so  that  by  reason  of 
contact  and  the  union  of  natures  the  proper  attributes  of  each 
belong  to  both,  as  the  Lord  receives  the  stripes  of  the  servant, 
while  the  servant  is  glorified  with  the  honor  of  the  Lord. 

The  godhead  ''empties"  itself  that  it  may  come  within  the 
capacity  of  the  human  nature,  and  the  human  nature  is  re- 
newed by  becoming  divine  through  its  commixture  with  the 
divine.  .  .  .'As  fire  that  lies  in  wood,  hidden  often  below  the 
surface,  and  is  unobserved  by  the  senses  of  those  who  see  or 
even  touch  it,  is  manifest,  however,  when  it  blazes  up,  so 
too,  at  His  death  (which  He  brought  about  at  His  will,  who 
separated  His  soul  from  His  body,  who  said  to  His  own  Father 
"Into  Thy  hands  I  commend  My  spirit"  [Luke  23  146], 
''who,"  as  He  says,  "had  power  to  lay  it  down  and  had 
power  to  take  it  again").  He  who,  because  He  is  the  Lord  of 
glory,  despised  that  which  is  shame  among  men,  having  con- 
cealed, as  it  were,  the  flame  of  His  Hfe  in  His  bodily  nature, 
by  the  dispensation  of  His  death,  kindled  and  inflamed  it 
once  more  by  the  power  of  His  own  godhead,  warming  into 
life  that  which  had  been  made  dead,  having  infused  with  the 
infinity  of  His  divine  power  those  humble  first-fruits  of  our 
nature;  made  it  also  to  be  that  which  He  himself  was,  the 
servile  form  to  be  the  Lord,  and  the  man  born  of  Mary  to 
be  Christ,  and  Him,  who  was  crucified  through  weakness,  to 
be  life  and  power,  and  making  all  such  things  as  are  piously 
conceived  to  be  in  God  the  Word  to  be  also  in  that  which  the 
Word  assumed;  so  that  these  attributes  no  longer  seem  to  be 
in  either  nature,  being,  by  commixture  with  the  divine,  made 
anew  in  conformity  with  the  nature  that  overwhelms  it;  par- 
ticipates in  the  power  of  the  godhead,  as  if  one  were  to  say 


504  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

that  a  mixture  makes  a  drop  of  vinegar  mingled  in  the  deep 
to  be  sea,  for  the  reason  that  the  natural  quality  of  this  liquid 
does  not  continue  in  the  infinity  of  that  which  overwhelms  it. 


§  89.    The  Nestorian  Controversy;   the  Council  of 
Ephesus  a.  D.  431. 

The  Council  of  Ephesus  was  called  to  settle  the  dispute 
which  had  arisen  between  Cyril  and  the  Alexandrians  and 
Nestorius,  archbishop  of  Constantinople,  and  the  Antiochians. 
Several  councils  had  been  held  previously,  and  much  acri- 
monious debate.  Both  parties  desired  a  council  to  adjust  the 
dispute.  The  Emperor  Theodosius  II,  in  an  edict  of  Novem- 
ber 19,  430,  called  a  council  to  be  held  on  the  following  Whit- 
sunday at  Ephesus.  The  council  was  opened  by  Cyril  and 
Memnon,  bishop  of  Ephesus,  June  22,  a  few  days  after  the 
date  assigned.  This  opening  of  the  synod  was  opposed  by 
the  imperial  commissioner  and  the  party  of  Nestorius,  be- 
cause many  of  the  Antiochians  had  not  yet  arjived.  Cyril 
and  Memnon,  who  had  undertaken  to  bring  about  the  con- 
demnation and  deposition  of  Nestorius,  forced  through  their 
programme.  On  June  26  or  27  the  Antiochians  arrived, 
and,  under  the  presidency  of  John  of  Antioch,  and  with  the 
approval  of  the  imperial  commissioner,  they  held  a  council 
attended  by  about  fifty  bishops,  while  two  hundred  attended 
the  rival  council  under  Cyril.  This  smaller  council  deposed 
Cyril  and  Memnon.  Both  synods  appealed  to  the  Emperor 
and  were  confirmed  by  him.  But  shortly  after  Cyril  and 
Memnon  were  restored.  The  Antiochians  now  violently 
attacked  the  successful  Alexandrians  but,  having  abandoned 
Nestorius,  patched  up  a  union  with  the  Alexandrians,  by 
which  Cyril  subscribed  in  433  to  a  creed  drawn  up  by  the 
Antiochians,  probably  by  Theodoret  of  Cyrus.  Accordingly, 
the  council  of  Cyrfl  was  now  recognized  by  the  Antiochians, 
as  well  as  by  the  imperial  authority,  and  became  known  as 
the  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431. 


THE  NESTORIAN  CONTROVERSY  505 

Additional  source  material:  Socrates,  Hist.  Ec,  VII,  29-34;  Theo- 
doret,  EpistulcE  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  Ill,  and  his  counter  propositions 
to  the  Anathemas  of  Cyril,  ibid.,  pp.  27-31;  Percival,  The  Seven  Ecu- 
menical Councils  (PNF). 

(a)  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Anathematisms,    Hahn,  §  219. 

Condemnation  of  the  position  of  Nestorius. 

Cyril  held  a  council  at  Alexandria  in  430,  in  which  he  set  forth  the 
teaching  of  Nestorius,  as  he  understood  it,  in  the  form  of  anathemas 
against  any  who  held  the  opinions  which  he  set  forth  in  order.  Nes- 
torius immediately  replied  by  corresponding  anathematisms.  They 
may  be  found  translated  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV,  p.  206,  where  they  are 
placed  alongside  of  Cyril's.  In  the  meantime,  Celestine  of  Rome  had 
called  upon  Nestorius  to  retract,  though  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  Nes- 
torian  or  Antiochian  position  was  more  in  harmony  with  the  position 
held  in  Rome,  e.  g.,  compare  Anath.  IV  with  the  language  of  Nestorius 
and  Leo,  see  Tome  of  Leo  in  §  90.  A  Greek  text  of  these  Anathema- 
tisms of  Cyril  may  be  found  also  in  Denziger,  n.  113,  as  they  were  de- 
scribed in  the  Fifth  General  Council  as  part  of  the  acts  of  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  A.  D.  431;  the  Latin  version  (the  Greek  is  lost)  of  the  Anathe- 
matisms of  Nestorius,  as  given  by  Marius  Mercator  are  in  Kirch,  nn. 
724-736. 

I.  If  any  one  shall  not  confess  that  the  Emmanuel  is  in 
truth  God,  and  that  therefore  the  holy  Virgin  is  Theotokos, 
inasmuch  as  according  to  the  flesh  she  bore  the  Word  of  God 
made  flesh;  let  him  be  anathema. 

II.  If  any  one  shall  not  confess  that  the  Word  of  God  the 
Father  is  united  according  to  hypostasis  to  flesh,  and  that 
with  the  flesh  of  His  own  He  is  one  Christ,  the  same  man- 
ifestly God  and  man  at  the  same  time;  let  him  be  anathema. 

ni.  If  any  one  after  the  union  divide  the  hypostases  in 
the  one  Christ,  joining  them  by  a  connection  only,  which  is 
according  to  worthiness,  or  even  authority  and  power,  and  not 
rather  by  a  coming  together,  which  is  made  by  a  union  ac- 
cording to  nature;  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV.  If  any  one  divide  between  the  two  persons  or  hypos- 
tases the  expressions  in  the  evangeHcal  and  apostolic  writ- 
ings, or  which  have  been  said  concerning  Christ  by  the  saints, 
or  by  Himself  concerning  Himself,  and  shall  apply  some  to 
Him  as  to  a  man  regarded  separately  apart  from  the  Word  of 


5o6  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

God,  and  shall  apply  others,  as  appropriate  to  God  only,  to 
the  Word  of  God  the  Father;  let  him  be  anathema. 

V.  If  any  one  dare  to  say  that  the  Christ  is  a  god-bearing 
man,  and  not  rather  that  He  is  in  truth  God,  as  an  only  Son 
by  nature,  because  "The  Word  was  made  flesh,"  and  hath 
share  in  flesh  and  blood  as  we  have;  let  him  be  anathema, 

VI.  If  any  one  shall  dare  to  say  that  the  Word  of  God  the 
Father  is  the  God  of  Christ  or  the  Lord  of  Christ,  and  shall 
not  rather  confess  Him  as  at  the  same  time  both  God  and  man, 
since  according  to  the  Scriptures  the  Word  became  flesh;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

VII.  If  any  one  say  that  Jesus  is,  as  a  man,  energized  by 
the  Word  of  God,  and  that  the  glory  of  the  Only  begotten  is 
attributed  to  Him  as  being  something  else  than  His  own;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

VIII.  If  any  one  say  that  the  man  assumed  ought  to  be 
worshipped  together  with  God  the  Word,  and  glorified  to- 
gether with  Him,  and  recognized  together  with  Him  as  God, 
as  one  being  with  another  (for  this  phrase  ''together  with" 
is  added  to  convey  this  meaning)  and  shall  not  rather  with 
one  adoration  worship  the  Emmanuel  and  pay  Him  one  glo- 
rification, because  ''the  Word  was  made  flesh";  let  him  be 
anathema. 

IX.  If  any  man  shall  say  that  the  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
was  glorified  by  the  Spirit,  so  that  He  used  through  Him  a 
power  not  His  own,  and  from  Him  received  power  against 
unclean  spirits,  and  power  to  perform  divine  signs  before 
men,  and  shall  not  rather  confess  that  it  was  His  own  spirit, 
through  which  He  worked  these  divine  signs;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

X.  The  divine  Scriptures  say  that  Christ  was  made  the 
high  priest  and  apostle  of  our  confession  [Heb.  3:1],  and  that 
for  our  sakes  He  offered  Himself  as  a  sweet  odor  to  God  the 
Father.  If  then  any  one  say  that  it  is  not  the  divine  Word 
himself,  when  He  was  made  flesh  and  had  become  man  as  we 
are,  but  another  than  He,  a  man  born  of  a  woman,  yet  dif- 


THE  NESTORIAN   CONTROVERSY  507 

ferent  from  Him  who  has  become  our  high  priest  and  apostle; 
or  if  any  one  say  that  He  offered  Himself  as  an  offering  for 
Himself,  and  not  rather  for  us,  whereas,  being  without  sin, 
He  had  no  need  of  offering;  let  him  be  anathema. 

XI.  If  any  one  shall  not  confess  that  the  flesh  of  the  Lord 
is  life-giving,  and  belongs  to  the  Word  of  God  the  Father  as 
His  very  own,  but  shall  pretend  that  it  belongs  to  another  who 
is  united  to  Him  according  to  worthiness,  and  who  has  served 
as  only  a  dwelling  for  the  Divinity;  and  shall  not  rather  con- 
fess that  that  flesh  is  Hfe-giving,  as  we  say,  because  it  has  been 
made  the  possession  of  the  Word  who  is  able  to  give  life  to  all ; 
let  him  be  anathema. 

XII.  If  any  one  shall  not  confess  that  the  Word  of  God 
suffered  in  the  flesh,  and  that  He  was  crucified  in  the  flesh, 
and  that  likewise  He  tasted  death  in  the  flesh,  and  that  He  is 
become  the  first-born  from  the  dead  [Col.  i  :  18],  for  as  God 
He  is  the  life  and  life-giving;  let  him  be  anathema. 

(b)  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  Condemnation  of  Nes- 
torius.     Mansi,  IV,  1211. 

The  text  may  also  be  found  in  Hefele,  §  134,  under  the  First  Session 
of  the  Council. 

The  holy  synod  says:  Since  in  addition  to  other  things  the 
impious  Nestorius  has  not  obeyed  our  Citation  and  did  not 
receive  the  most  holy  and  God-fearing  bishops  who  were  sent 
to  him  by  us,  we  were  compelled  to  proceed  to  the  examina- 
tion of  his  impieties.  And,  discovering  from  his  letters  and 
treatises  and  from  the  discourses  recently  delivered  by  him  in 
this  metropohs,  which  have  been  testified  to,  that  he  has  held 
and  published  impious  doctrines,  and  being  compelled  thereto 
by  the  canons  and  by  the  letter  of  our  most  holy  father  and 
fellow-servant  Celestine,  the  Roman  bishop,  we  have  come, 
with  many  tears,  to  this  sorrowful  sentence  against  him:  Our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  whom  he  has  blasphemed,  decrees  through 
the  present  most  holy  synod  that  Nestorius  be  excluded  from 
the  episcopal  dignity  and  from  all  priestly  communion. 


5o8  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

(c)  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  Ep.  ad  Celestinum, 
Mansi,  IV,  1330-1338. 

The  letter  is  very  long  and  gives  an  almost  complete  history  of  the 
council.  It  may  be  found  complete  in  PNF,  loc.  cU.,  p.  237.  It  is  of 
special  importance  in  connection  with  the  Pelagian  controversy,  as  it 
states  that  the  Council  of  Ephesus  had  confirmed  the  Western  depo- 
sition of  the  Pelagians. 

The  letters  were  read  which  were  written  to  him  [Nestorius] 
by  the  most  holy  and  reverend  bishop  of  the  church  of  Alex- 
andria, Cyril,  which  the  holy  synod  approved  as  being  ortho- 
dox and  without  fault,  and  in  no  point  out  of  agreement, 
either  with  the  divinely  inspired  Scriptures,  or  with  the  faith 
handed  down  and  set  forth  in  the  great  synod  by  the  holy 
Fathers  who  were  assembled  some  time  ago  at  Nicaea,  as 
your  holiness,  also  rightly  having  examined  this,  has  given 
witness.  .  .  . 

When  there  had  been  read  in  the  holy  synod  what  had  been 
done  touching  the  deposition  of  the  irreligious  Pelagians  and 
Celestinians,  of  Celestius,  Pelagius,  Julianus,  Praesidius, 
Florus,  Marcellinus,  and  Orontius,  and  those  incKned  to  Hke 
errors,  we  also  deemed  it  right  that  the  determinations  of 
your  holiness  concerning  them  should  stand  strong  and  firm. 
And  we  all  were  of  the  same  mind,  holding  them  deposed. 

(d)  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  Canons,  Bruns,  I,  24. 
The  text  may  be  found  also  in  Hefele,  §  141. 

Whereas  it  is  needful  that  they  who  were  detained  from  the 
holy  synod  and  remained  in  their  own  district  or  city  for  any 
reason,  ecclesiastical  or  personal,  should  not  be  ignorant  of 
the  matters  which  were  decreed  by  the  synod;  we  therefore 
notify  your  holiness  and  charity  that 

I.  If  any  metropolitan  of  a  province,  forsaking  the  holy 
and  ecumenical  synod,  has  joined  the  assembly  of  apostasy 
[the  council  under  John  of  Antioch],  or  shall  join  the  same 
hereafter;  or  if  he  has  adopted,  or  shall  adopt,  the  doctrines 


THE  NESTORIAN   CONTROVERSY  509 

of  Celestius/  he  has  no  power  in  any  way  to  do  anything  in 
opposition  to  the  bishops  of  the  province  because  he  is  already 
cast  forth  by  the  synod  from  all  ecclesiastical  communion, 
and  is  without  authority;  but  he  shall  be  subjected  to  the 
same  bishops  of  the  province  and  to  the  neighboring  bishops 
who  hold  the  orthodox  doctrines,  to  be  degraded  completely 
from  his  episcopal  rank. 

II.  If  any  provincial  bishops  were  not  present  at  the  holy 
synod,  and  have  joined  or  attempted  to  join  the  apostasy; 
or  if,  after  subscribing  to  the  deposition  of  Nestorius,  they 
went  back  to  the  assembly  of  apostasy,  these,  according  to 
the  decree  of  the  holy  synod,  are  to  be  deposed  completely 
from  the  priesthood  and  degraded  from  their  rank. 

(e)  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  Manifesto  of  John  of 
Antioch  and  his  council  against  Cyril  and  his  council.  Mansi, 
IV,  1271. 

The  holy  synod  assembled  in  Ephesus,  by  the  grace  of  God 
and  at  the  command  of  the  pious  emperors,  declares:  We 
should  indeed  have  wished  to  be  able  to  hold  a  synod  in  peace, 
according  to  the  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers  and  the  letters 
of  our  most  pious  and  Christ-loving  emperors;  but  because 
you  held  a  separate  assembly  from  a  heretical,  insolent,  and 
obstinate  disposition,  although,  according  to  the  letters  of  our 
most  pious  emperors,  we  were  in  the  neighborhood,  and  be- 
cause you  have  filled  both  the  city  and  the  holy  synod  with 
every  sort  of  confusion,  in  order  to  prevent  the  examination 
of  points  agreeing  with  the  Apollinarian,  Arian,  and  Euno- 
mian  heresies  and  impieties,  and  have  not  waited  for  the  ar- 
rival of  the  most  rehgious  bishops  summoned  from  all  regions 
by  our  pious  emperors,  and  when  the  most  magnificent  Count 
Candidianus  warned  you  and  admonished  you  in  writing  and 
verbally  that  you  should  not  hear  such  a  matter,  but  await 

^The  friendly  treatment  Nestorius  had  given  the  exiled  Pelagians,  when 
they  came  to  Constantinople,  had  led  the  men  of  the  West  to  connect  Nesto- 
rianism  with  Pelagianism  and  to  condemn  the  two  as  if  there  was  some  neces- 
sary connection  between  them. 


5IO  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

the  common  judgment  of  all  the  most  holy  bishops;  there- 
fore know  thou,  O  Cyril,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  thou,  O 
Memnon,  bishop  of  this  city,  that  ye  are  dismissed  and  de- 
posed from  all  sacerdotal  functions  as  the  originators  and 
leaders  of  all  this  disorder  and  lawlessness,  and  those  who 
have  violated  the  canons  of  the  Fathers  and  the  imperial 
decrees.  And  all  ye  others  who  seditiously  and  wickedly, 
and  contrary  to  all  ecclesiastical  sanctions  and  the  royal  de- 
crees, gave  your  consent  are  excommunicated  until  you  ac- 
knowledge your  fault  and  reform  and  accept  anew  the  faith 
set  forth  by  the  holy  Fathers  at  Nicaia,  adding  to  it  nothing 
foreign  or  different,  and  until  ye  anathematize  the  heretical 
propositions  of  Cyril,  which  are  plainly  repugnant  to  evan- 
gelical and  apostolic  doctrine,  and  in  all  things  comply  with 
the  letters  of  our  most  pious  and  Christ-loving  emperors,  who 
require  a  peaceful  and  accurate  consideration  of  the  dogma. 

(/)  Creed  of  Antioch  A.  D.  433.     Hahn,  §  170. 

This  creed  was  probably  composed  by  Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  and  was 
sent  by  Count  Johannes  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius  in  431  as  express- 
ing the  teaching  of  the  Antiochian  party.  The  bitterest  period  of  the 
Nestorian  controversy  was  after  the  council  which  is  commonly  re- 
garded as  having  settled  it.  The  Antiochians  and  the  Alexandrians 
attacked  each  other  vigorously.  At  last,  in  433,  John,  bishop  of  Anti- 
och, sent  the  creed  given  below  to  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  who  signed  it. 
The  creed  expresses  accurately  the  position  of  Nestorius.  In  this  way 
a  union  was  patched  up  between  the  contending  parties.  But  the 
irreconcilable  Nestorians  left  the  Church  permanently.  This  creed 
in  the  form  in  which  it  had  been  presented  to  the  Emperor  was  at  the 
beginning  and  the  end  worded  somewhat  differently,  cj.  Hahn,  loc.  cit., 
note. 

We  therefore  acknowledge  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God,  the  only  begotten,  complete  God  and  complete  man, 
of  a  rational  soul  and  body;  begotten  of  the  Father  before  the 
ages  according  to  His  godhead,  but  in  the  last  days  for  us  and 
for  our  salvation,  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  according  to  the  man- 
hood; that  He  is  of  the  same  nature  as  the  Father  according 
to  His  godhead,  and  of  the  same  nature  with  us  according  to 


THE  EUTYCHIAN   CONTROVERSY  511 

His  manhood;  for  a  union  of  the  two  natures  has  been  made; 
therefore  we  confess  one  Christ,  one  Son,  one  Lord.  Accord- 
ing to  this  conception  of  the  unconfused  union,  we  confess 
that  the  holy  Virgin  is  Theotokos,  because  God  the  Word  was 
made  flesh  and  became  man,  and  from  her  conception  united 
with  Himself  the  temple  received  from  her.  We  recognize 
the  evangeHcal  and  apostohc  utterances  concerning  the  Lord, 
making  common,  as  in  one  person,  the  divine  and  the  human 
characteristics,  but  distinguishing  them  as  in  two  natures;  and 
teaching  that  the  godlike  traits  are  according  to  the  godhead 
of  Christ,  and  the  humble  traits  according  to  His  manhood. 

§  90.    The  Eutychian  Controversy  and  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  a.  D.  451 

What  is  known  as  the  Eutychian  controversy  is  less  a  dog- 
matic controversy  than  a  struggle  between  the  patriarchs 
of  the  East  for  supremacy,  using  party  theological  differences 
as  a  support.  Few  passages  in  the  history  of  the  Church  are 
more  painful.  The  union  made  in  433  between  the  Antioch- 
ian  and  Alexandrian  parties  lasted  fifteen  years,  or  until  after 
the  death  of  those  who  entered  into  it.  At  Antioch  Domnus 
became  bishop  in  442,  at  Alexandria  Dioscurus  in  444,  and 
at  Constantinople  Flavian  in  446.  Early  in  448  Dioscurus, 
who  aimed  at  the  domination  of  the  East,  began  to  attack 
the  Antiochians  as  Nestorians.  In  this  he  was  supported  at 
Constantinople  by  Chrysaphius,  the  all-powerful  minister  of 
the  weak  Theodosius  II,  and  the  archimandrite  Eutyches,  the 
godfather  of  the  minister.  Eusebius  of  Dorylaeum  thereupon 
accused  Eutyches,  who  held  the  Alexandrian  position  in  an 
extreme  form,  of  being  heretical  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Incar- 
nation. Eutyches  was  condemned  by  Flavian  at  an  endemic 
synod  [cf.  DCA,  I,  474],  November  22,  448.  Both  Eutyches 
and  Flavian  [cf.  Leo  the  Great,  Ep.  21,  22]  thereupon 
turned  to  Leo,  bishop  of  Rome.  Leo,  abandoning  the  tra- 
ditional Roman  alliance  with  Alexandria,  on  which  Dioscurus 


512  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

had  counted,  supported  Flavian,  sending  him  June  13,  449,  a 
dogmatic  epistle  (the  Tome,  Ep.  28)  defining,  in  the  terms 
of  Western  theology,  the  point  at  issue.  A  synod  was  now 
called  by  Theodosius  at  Ephesus,  August,  449,  in  which  Dios- 
curus  with  the  support  of  the  court  triumphed.  Eutyches 
was  restored,  and  the  leaders  of  the  Antiochian  party,  Flavian, 
Eusebius,  Ibas,  Theodoret,  and  others  deposed.  Flavian  [cf. 
Kirch,  nn.  804^.],  Eusebius,  and  Theodoret  appealed  to  Leo, 
who  vigorously  denounced  the  synod  as  a  council  of  robbers 
(Latrocinium  Ephesinum).  At  the  same  time  the  situation 
at  the  court,  upon  which  Dioscurus  depended,  was  com- 
pletely changed  by  the  fall  of  Chrysaphius  and  the  death  of 
Theodosius.  Pulcheria,  his  sister,  and  Marcian,  her  husband, 
succeeded  to  the  throne,  both  adherents  of  the  Antiochian 
party,  and  opposed  to  the  ecclesiastical  aspirations  of  Dios- 
curus. A  new  synod  was  now  called  by  Marcian  at  Chalcedon, 
a  suburb  of  Constantinople.  Dioscurus  was  deposed,  as  well 
as  Eutyches,  but  Ibas  and  Theodoret  were  restored  after  an 
examination  of  their  teaching.  A  definition  was  drawn  up 
in  harmony  with  the  Tome  of  Leo.  It  was  a  triumph  for 
Leo,  which  was  somewhat  lessened  by  the  passage  of  canon 
28,  based  upon  the  third  canon  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381, 
a  council  which  was  henceforth  recognized  as  the  "Second 
General  Council."  Leo  refused  to  approve  this  canon,  which 
remained  in  force  in  the  East  and  was  renewed  at  the  Quin- 
isext  Council  A.  D.  692. 

Additional  source  material:  W.  Bright,  Select  Sermons  of  S.  Leo  the 
Great  on  the  Incarnation;  with  his  twenty-eighth  Epistle  called  the  "  Tome,'' 
Second  ed.,  London,  1886;  Percival,  llie  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils 
(PNF);  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  1-5,  18,  Eng.  trans.,  London,  1846 
(also  in  Bohn's  Ecclesiastical  Library) ;  also  much  material  in  Hef ele, 
§§  170-208. 

(a)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  448,  Acts.    Mansi,  VI, 

741/- 

The  position  of  Eutyches  and  his  condemnation. 

Inasmuch  as  Eutyches  was  no  theologian  and  no  man  of  letters,  he 


THE  EUTYCHIAN   CONTROVERSY  513 

has  left  no  worked-out  statement  of  his  position.  What  he  taught  can 
be  gathered  only  from  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Constantinople  A.  D. 
448.  These  were  incorporated  in  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus, 
A.  D.  449,  and  as  his  friends  were  there  they  may  be  regarded  as  trust- 
worthy. The  acts  of  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  A.  D.  449  were  read  in 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  and  in  this  way  the  matter  is 
known. 

The  following  passages  are  taken  from  the  seventh  sitting  of  the 
Council  of  Constantinople,  November  22,  448. 

Archbishop  Flavian  said:  Do  you  confess  that  the  one  and 
the  same  Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  consubstantial  with 
His  Father  as  to  His  divinity,  and  consubstantial  with  His 
mother  as  to  His  humanity? 

Eutyches  said:  When  I  intrusted  myself  to  your  holiness 
I  said  that  you  should  not  ask  me  further  what  I  thought  con- 
cerning the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost. 

The  archbishop  said:  Do  you  confess  Christ  to  be  of  two 
natures? 

Eutyches  said:  I  have  never  yet  presumed  to  speculate 
concerning  the  nature  of  my  God,  the  Lord  of  heaven  and 
earth;  I  confess  that  I  have  never  said  that  He  is  consubstan- 
tial with  us.  Up  to  the  present  day  I  have  not  said  that  the 
body  of  our  Lord  and  God  was  consubstantial  with  us ;  I  con- 
fess that  the  holy  Virgin  is  consubstantial  with  us,  and  that 
of  her  our  God  was  incarnate.  .  .  . 

Florentius,  the  patrician,  said :  Since  the  mother  is  consub- 
stantial with  us,  doubtless  the  Son  is  consubstantial  with  us. 

Eutyches  said:  I  have  not  said,  you  will  notice,  that  the 
body  of  a  man  became  the  body  of  God,  but  the  body  was 
human,  and  the  Lord  was  incarnate  of  the  Virgin.  If  you 
wish  that  I  should  add  to  this  that  His  body  is  consubstantial 
with  us,  I  will  do  this;  but  I  do  not  understand  the  term  con- 
substantial in  such  a  way  that  I  do  not  deny  that  he  is  the 
Son  of  God.  Formerly  I  spoke  in  general  not  of  a  consub- 
stantiality  according  to  the  flesh;  now  I  will  do  so,  because 
your  Holiness  demands  it.'  .  .  . 

Florentius  said:   Do  you  or  do  you  not  confess  that  our 


514  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Lord,  who  is  of  the  Virgin,  is  consubstantial  and  of  two  na- 
tures after  the  incarnation? 

Eutyches  said:  I  confess  that  our  Lord  was  of  two  natures 
before  the  union  [i.  e.,  the  union  of  divinity  and  humanity  in 
the  incarnation],  but  after  the  union  one  nature.  ...  I  fol- 
low the  teaching  of  the  blessed  Cyril  and  the  holy  Fathers  and 
the  holy  Athanasius,  because  they  speak  of  two  natures  be- 
fore the  union,  but  after  the  union  and  incarnation  they 
speak  not  of  two  natures  but  of  one  nature. 

Condemnation  of  Eutyches. 

Eutyches,  formerly  presbyter  and  archimandrite,  has  been 
shown,  by  what  has  taken  place  and  by  his  own  confession,  to 
be  infected  with  the  heresy  of  Valentinus  and  ApoUinaris,  and 
to  follow  stubbornly  their  blasphemies,  and  rejecting  our 
arguments  and  teaching,  is  unwilling  to  consent  to  true  doc- 
trines. Therefore,  weeping  and  mourning  his  complete  per- 
versity, we  have  decreed  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
has  been  blasphemed  by  him,  that  he  be  deprived  of  every 
sacerdotal  office,  that  he  be  put  out  of  our  communion,  and 
deprived  of  his  position  over  a  monastery.  All  who  hereafter 
speak  with  him  or  associate  with  him,  are  to  know  that  they 
also  are  fallen  into  the  same  penalty  of  excommunication. 

(b)  Leo  the  Great,  Epistola  Dogmatica  or  the  Tome. 
Halm,  §176.     (MSL,  54:763.) 

This  letter  was  written  to  Flavian  on  the  subject  which  had  been 
raised  by  the  condemnation  of  Eutyches  in  448.  It  is  of  the  first  im- 
portance, not  merely  in  the  history  of  the  Church,  but  also  in  the  his- 
tory of  doctrine.  Yet  it  cannot  be  said  that  Leo  advanced  beyond 
the  traditional  formulae  of  the  West,  or  struck  out  new  thoughts  \cf. 
Augustine,  Ep.  187,  text  and  translation  of  most  important  part  in 
Norris,  Rudiments  of  Theology,  1894,  pp.  262-266].  It  was  to  be  read 
at  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  449  A.  D.,  but  was  not.  It  soon  became 
widely  known,  however,  and  was  approved  at  the  endemic  Council  of 
Constantinople,  A.  D.  450,  and  when  read  at  Chalcedon,  the  Fathers  of 
the  council  cried  out:  "Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo." 

It  may  be  found  translated  in  PNF,  ser  II,  vol.  XII,  p.  38,  and  again 
vol.  XIV,  p.  254.     The  best  critical  text  is  given  in  Hahn,  §  224.     A 


THE  EUTYCHIAN   CONTROVERSY  515 

translation  with  valuable  notes  may  be  found  in  Wm.  Bright,  op.  cit. 
Hefele,  §  176,  gives  a  paraphrase  and  text  with  useful  notes.  The  most 
significant  passages,  which  are  here  translated,  may  be  found  in  Den- 
ziger,  nn.  143  /. 

Ch.  3.  Without  detracting  from  the  properties  of  either 
nature  and  substance,  which  came  together  in  one  person, 
majesty  took  on  humility;  strength,  weakness;  eternity,  mor- 
tahty;  and  to  pay  off  the  debt  of  our  condition  inviolable 
nature  was  united  to  passible  nature,  so  that  as  proper 
remedy  for  us,  one  and  the  same  mediator  between  God  and 
man,  the  man  Jesus  Christ,  could  both  die  with  the  one  and 
not  die  with  the  other.  Thus  in  the  whole  and  perfect  nature 
of  true  man  was  true  God  born,  complete  in  what  was  His 
and  complete  in  what  was  ours.  .  .  . 

Ch.  4.  There  enters,  therefore,  these  lower  parts  of  the 
world  the  Son  of  God,  descending  from  His  heavenly  seat,  and 
not  quitting  the  glory  of  His  Father,  begotten  in  a  new  order 
by  a  new  nativity.  In  a  new  order:  because  He  who  was  in- 
visible in  His  own  nature,  was  made  visible  in  ours;  He  who 
was  incomprehensible  [could  not  be  contained],  became  com- 
prehensible in  ours;  remaining  before  all  times,  He  began  to 
be  in  time;  the  Lord  of  all,  He  took  upon  Him  the  form  of  a 
servant,  having  obscured  His  immeasurable  majesty.  He  who 
was  God,  incapable  of  suffering,  did  not  disdain  to  be  man, 
capable  of  suffering,  and  the  immortal  to  subject  Himself  to 
the  laws  of  death.  Born  by  a  new  nativity:  because  the  in- 
violate virginity  knew  not  concupiscence,  it  ministered  the 
material  of  the  flesh.  The  nature  of  the  Lord  was  assumed 
from  the  mother,  not  sin;  and  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  born 
of  the  womb  of  the  Virgin,  because  His  nativity  is  wonderful, 
yet  is  His  nature  not  dissimilar  to  ours.  For  He  who  is  true 
God,  is  likewise  true  man,  and  there  is  no  fraud  ^  since  both 
the  humiHty  of  the  man  and  the  loftiness  of  God  meet.^    For 

^I.  e.,  not  mere  appearance  without  reality,  as  in  Docetism  and  Monophysi- 
tism. 

^Hefele,  loc.  cit.,  interprets  the  phra.se,  invicem  sunt  as  a  mutual  interpene- 
tration. 


5i6  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

as  God  is  not  changed  by  the  manifestation  of  pity,  so  the 
man  is  not  consumed  [absorbed]  by  the  dignity.  For  each 
form  [i.  e.,  nature]  does  in  communion  with  the  other  what 
is  proper  to  it  [agit  enim  utraque  forma  cum  alterius  com- 
munione  quod  proprium  est]\  namely,  by  the  action  of  the 
Word  what  is  of  the  Word,  and  by  the  flesh  carrying  out  what 
is  of  the  flesh.  One  of  these  is  briUiant  with  miracles,  the 
other  succumbs  to  injuries.  And  as  the  Word  does  not  de- 
part from  equality  with  the  paternal  glory,  so  the  flesh  does 
not  forsake  the  nature  of  our  race.^ 

{c)  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  Definition.    Mansi, 

vn,  107. 

The  definition  of  Chalcedon  lays  down  the  fundamental  principles 
upon  which  rests  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation,  both  in  Eastern  and 
Western  theology.  It  is  the  necessary  complement  and  result  of  the 
discussion  that  led  to  the  definition  of  Nicaea,  and  is  theologically  second 
only  to  that  in  importance.  At  Nicaea  the  true  and  eternal  deity  of 
the  Son  who  became  incarnate  was  defined;  at  Chalcedon  the  true, 
complete,  and  abiding  humanity  of  manhood  of  the  incarnate  Son  of 
God.  In  this  way  two  natures  were  asserted  to  be  in  the  incarnate 
Logos.  According  to  Chalcedon,  which  came  after  the  Nestorian 
and  the  Eutychian  controversies,  these  natures  are  neither  to  be  con- 
fused so  that  the  divine  nature  suffers  or  the  human  nature  is  lost  in 
the  divine,  nor  to  be  separated  so  as  to  constitute  two  persons.  The 
definition  was,  however,  not  preceded  by  any  clear  understanding  of 
what  was  to  be  understood  by  nature  in  relation  to  hypostasis.  This 
was  left  for  later  discussion.  There  was  even  then  left  open  the  ques- 
tion as  to  the  relation  of  the  will  to  the  nature,  and  this  gave  rise  to 
the  Monothelete  controversy  (see  §  no).  But  the  definition  of  Chalce- 
don is  important  not  merely  for  the  history  of  doctrine  but  also  for 
the  general  history  of  the  Church.  The  course  of  Christianity  in  the 
East  depends  upon  the  great  controversies,  and  in  Monophysitism  the 
Church  of  the  East  was  spHt  into  permanent  divisions.  The  divisions 
of  the  Eastern  Church  prepared  the  way  for  the  Moslem  conquests. 
The  attempts  made  to  set  aside  the  definition  of  Chalcedon  as  a  po- 

^  In  explanation  of  this  Leo  adds  further  on :  To  be  hungry  and  thirsty,  to 
be  weary  and  to  sleep,  is  clearly  human;  but  to  satisfy  five  thousand  men 
with  five  loaves,  and  to  bestow  on  the  woman  of  Samaria  living  water  .  .  . 
is,  without  doubt,  divine.  ...  It  is  not  the  part  of  the  same  nature  to  be 
moved  to  pity  for  a  dead  friend,  and  when  the  stone  that  closed  that  four 
days '  grave  was  removed,  to  raise  that  same  friend  to  life  with  a  voice  of 
command. 


THE   EUTYCHIAN   CONTROVERSY  517 

litical  move  led  to  a  temporary  schism  between  the  East  and  the 
West. 

In  this  definition,  it  should  be  noted,  the  Council  of  Constantinople, 
A.  D.  381,  for  the  first  time  takes  its  place  alongside  of  Nicaea  and 
Ephesus,  A.  D.  431,  and  the  so-called  creed  of  Constantinople  is  placed 
on  the  same  level  as  the  creed  put  forth  at  Nicaea.  The  creed  of  Con- 
stantinople eventually  took  the  place  of  the  creed  of  Nicaea  even  in 
the  East. 

The  text  of  the  definition  may  be  found  in  its  most  important  dog- 
matic part  in  Hefele,  §  193;  Hahn,  §  146;  Denziger,  n.  148.  For  a  gen- 
eral description  of  the  council,  see  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  II,  3,  4.  Ex- 
tracts from  the  acts  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV,  243  f. 

The  holy,  great,  and  ecumenical  synod,  assembled  by  the 
grace  of  God  and  the  command  of  our  most  religious  and 
Christian  Emperors  Marcian  and  Valentinian,  Augusti,  at 
Chalcedon,  the  metropoHs  of  the  province  of  Bithynia,  in 
the  martyry  of  the  holy  and  victorious  martyr  Euphemia, 
has  decreed  as  follows: 

Our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  when  strengthening  the 
knowledge  of  the  faith  in  his  disciples,  to  the  end  that  no  one 
might  disagree  with  his  neighbor  concerning  the  doctrines  of 
religion,  and  that  the  proclamation  of  the  truth  might  be  set 
forth  equally  to  all  men,  said:  "My  peace  I  leave  with  you, 
my  peace  I  give  unto  you."  But  since  the  Evil  One  does  not 
desist  from  sowing  tares  among  the  seeds  of  godhness,  but 
ever  invents  something  new  against  the  truth,  therefore  the 
Lord,  providing,  as  He  ever  does,  for  the  human  race,  has 
raised  up  this  pious,  faithful,  and  zealous  sovereign,  and  He 
has  called  together  unto  Himself  from  all  parts  the  chief 
rulers  of  the  priesthood,  so  that,  with  the  grace  of  Christ,  our 
common  Lord,  inspiring  us,  we  may  cast  off  every  plague  of 
falsehood  from  the  sheep  of  Christ  and  feed  them  with  the 
tender  leaves  of  truth.  And  this  we  have  done,  with  unan- 
imous consent  driving  away  erroneous  doctrine  and  renew- 
ing the  unerring  faith  of  the  Fathers,  pubhshing  to  all  the 
creed  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  [i.  e.,  the  creed  of 
Nicaea],  and  to  their  number  adding  as  Fathers  those  who 
have  received  the  same  summary  of  religion.     Such  are  the 


5i8  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

one  hundred  and  fifty  who  afterward  assembled  in  great  Con- 
stantinople and  ratified  the  same  faith.  Moreover,  observing 
the  order  and  every  form  relating  to  the  faith  which  was  ob- 
served by  the  holy  synod  formerly  held  in  Ephesus,  of  which 
Celestine  of  Rome  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  of  holy  memory, 
were  the  leaders  [i.  e.,  Ephesus  A.  D.  431],  we  do  declare  that 
the  exposition  of  the  right  and  blameless  faith  made  by  the 
three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  assem- 
bled at  Nicaea  in  the  reign  of  Constantine,  of  pious  memory, 
shall  be  pre-eminent,  and  that  those  things  shall  be  of  force 
also  which  were  decreed  by  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  holy 
Fathers  at  Constantinople  for  the  uprooting  of  the  heresies 
which  had  then  sprung  up  and  for  the  confirmation  of  the 
same  Catholic  and  apostolic  faith  of  ours. 

Then  follow: 

"The  Creed  of  the  Three  Hundred  and  Eighteen  Fathers 
at  Nica^a."  The  so-called  Constantinopolitan  creed,  without 
the  "fiUoque." 

This  wise  and  salutary  formula  of  divine  grace  sufficed  for 
the  perfect  knowledge  and  confirmation  of  religion;  for  it 
teaches  the  perfect  doctrine  concerning  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  and  sets  forth  the  incarnation  of  the  Lord  to  them  that 
faithfully  receive  it.  But  forasmuch  as  persons  undertaking 
to  make  void  the  preaching  of  the  truth  have  through  their 
individual  heresies  given  rise  to  empty  babblings,  some  of 
them  daring  to  corrupt  the  mystery  of  the  Lord's  incarnation 
for  us  and  refusing  to  use  the  name  Theotokos  in  reference  to 
the  Virgin,  while  others  bringing  in  a  confusion  and  mixture, 
and  idly  conceiving  that  there  is  one  nature  of  the  flesh  and 
the  godhead,  maintaining  that  the  divine  nature  of  the  Only 
begotten  is  by  mixture  capable  of  suffering;  therefore  this 
present,  great,  and  ecumenical  synod,  desiring  to  exclude  from 
them  every  device  against  the  truth  and  teaching  that  which 
is  unchanged  from  the  beginning,  has  at  the  very  outset  de- 
creed that  the  faith  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  Fathers 
shall  be  preserved  inviolate.     And  on  account  of  them  that 


THE  EUTYCHIAN  CONTROVERSY     519 

contend  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  confirms  the  doctrine 
afterward  deHvered  concerning  the  substance  of  the  Spirit  by 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  holy  Fathers  assembled  in  the  im- 
perial city,  which  doctrine  they  declare  unto  all  men,  not  as 
though  they  were  introducing  anything  that  had  been  lack- 
ing in  their  predecessors,  but  in  order  to  explain  through 
written  documents  their  faith  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost 
against  those  who  were  seeking  to  destroy  His'  sovereignty. 
And  on  account  of  those  who  are  attempting  to  corrupt  the 
mystery  of  the  dispensation  [i.  e.,  the  incarnation],  and  who 
shamelessly  pretend  that  He  who  was  born  of  the  holy  Virgin 
Mary  was  a  mere  man,  it  receives  the  synodical  letters  of  the 
blessed  Cyril,  pastor  of  the  church  of  Alexandria,  addressed 
to  Nestorius  and  to  the  Easterns,^  judging  them  suitable  for 
the  refutation  of  the  frenzied  folly  of  Nestorius  and  for  the 
instruction  of  those  who  long  with  holy  ardor  for  a  knowledge 
of  the  saving  symbol.  And  to  these  it  has  rightly  added 
for  the  confirmation  of  the  orthodox  doctrines  the  letter  of 
the  president  of  the  great  and  old  Rome,  the  most  blessed  and 
holy  Archbishop  Leo,  which  was  addressed  to  Archbishop 
Flavian,  of  blessed  memory,^  for  the  removal  of  the  false  doc- 
trines of  Eutyches,  judging  them  to  be  agreeable  to  the  con- 
fession of  the  great  Peter  and  to  be  a  common  pillar  against 
misbelievers.  For  it  opposes  those  who  would  rend  the  mys- 
tery of  the  dispensation  into  a  duad  of  Sons;  it  repels  from 
the  sacred  assembly  those  who  dare  to  say  that  the  godhead 
of  the  Only  begotten  is  capable  of  suffering;  it  resists  those 
who  imagine  there  is  a  mixture  or  confusion  in  the  two  na- 
tures of  Christ;  it  drives  away  those  who  fancy  His  form 
as  a  servant  is  of  an  heavenly  or  of  some  substance  other 
than  that  which  was  taken  of  us,^  and  it  anathematizes 
those  who  foohshly  talk  of  two  natures  of  our  Lord  before 

^  See  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV;  To  Nestorius,  p.  197;  To  the  Easterns,  i.  e., 
to  John  of  Antioch  (Cyril,  Ep.  39),  p.  251. 

2  See  above,  the  Tome  of  Leo. 

3  It  was  charged  against  Eutyches  that  he  taught  that  the  Son  brought  His 
body  with  Him  from  heaven.    This  Eutyches  denied. 


520  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

the  union,^  conceiving  that  after  the  union  there  was  only 
one. 2 

Following  the  holy  Fathers,^  we  all  with  one  voice  teach  men 
to  confess  that  the  Son  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  one  and  the 
same,  that  He  is  perfect  in  godhead  and  perfect  in  manhood, 
truly  God  and  truly  man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and  body,consub- 
stantial  with  His  Father  as  touching  His  godhead,  and  consub- 
stantial  with  us  as  to  His  manhood,^  in  all  things  like  unto  us, 
without  sin;  begotten  of  His  Father  before  all  worlds  accord- 
ing to  His  godhead;  but  in  these  last  days  for  us  and  for  our 
salvation  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  Theotokos,  according  to 
His  manhood,  one  and  the  same  Christ,  Son,  Lord,  only  be- 
gotten Son,^  in^  two  natures,  unconfusedly,  immutably,  indi- 
visibly,  inseparably;  the  distinction  of  natures  being  pre- 
served and  concurring  in  one  person  and  hypostasis,"^  not 
separated  or  divided  into  two  persons,  but  one  and  the  same 
Son  and  Only  begotten,  God  the  Word,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
as  the  prophets  from  the  beginning  have  spoken  concerning 
Him,  and  as  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself  has  taught  us,  and 
as  the  creed  of  the  Fathers  has  delivered  us. 

These  things  having  been  expressed  by  us  with  great  ac- 
curacy and  attention,  the  holy  ecumenical  synod  decrees 
that  no  one  shall  be  permitted  to  bring  forward  another 


^  This  is  the  position  of  Eutyches.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  also  taught  the  same; 
cf.  Loofs,  Leitfaden  zum  Stiidium  der  Dogmengeschichte,  1906,  §  ^t,  2. 

2  Cyril's  phrase  was  "The  one  nature  of  the  incarnate  Logos";  cf.  Ottley,  The 
Doctrine  of  the  Incarnation,  1896,  II,  93. 

3  The  text  of  this  passage,  the  most  important  dogmatically,  may  be  found 
in  all  the  references  given  above. 

^  Against  Eutyches,  who  denied  this  point,  and  also  against  Apollinaris,  v. 
supra,  §  88,  a. 

^The  Nestorians  were  accused  of  dividing  the  person  of  Christ  into  two 
Sons. 

^The  present  Greek  text  reads  "of  two  natures,"  but  "in  two  natures"  was 
the  original  reading.  For  the  evidence,  see  Hefele,  §  193  (Eng.  trans..  Ill,  p. 
348,  note);  see  also  Hahn,  §  146,  n.  34.  "Of"  appears  to  be  an  early  forgery. 
On  the  other  side,  see  Dorner,  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  tlie  Person  of  Christ,  Eng. 
trans.,  div.  II,  vol.  I,  p.  411;  Baur,  Dreieinigkeit,  I,  820/. 

^  np6a(i)xoi'  and  ux6aTaat<;  are  here  used  as  probably  not  distinguishable;  see 
Hatch,  Hihbert  Lectures^  pp.  275^;   Loofs  in  PRE,  V,  637,  1.  12. 


THE  EUTYCHIAN   CONTROVERSY  521 

faith/  nor  to  write,  nor  to  compose,  nor  to  excogitate,  nor  to 
teach  such  to  others.  But  such  as  dare  to  compose  another 
faith,  or  to  bring  forward,  or  to  teach,  or  to  dehver  another 
creed  to  such  as  wish  to  be  converted  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth  from  among  the  Gentiles  or  the  Jews,  or  any  heresy 
whatever;  if  they  be  bishops  or  clerics,  let  them  be  deposed, 
the  bishops  from  the  episcopate,  the  clerics  from  the  clerical 
rank;  but  if  they  be  monks  or  laymen,  let  them  be  anathe- 
matized. 

{d)  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  Canon  28.  Bruns, 
I,  32. 

The  rank  of  the  see  of  Constantinople. 

This  canon  is  closely  connected  with  Canon  3  of  Constantinople, 
A.  D.  381,  but  goes  beyond  that  in  extending  the  authority  of  Con- 
stantinople. With  this  canon  should  be  compared  Canons  9  and  17  of 
Chalcedon,  which,  taken  with  Canon  28,  make  Constantinople  supreme 
in  the  East.  For  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Canon  was  passed, 
see  Hefele,  §  200.  The  letter  of  the  council  submitting  its  decrees  to 
Leo  for  approval  and  explaining  this  canon  is  among  the  Epistles  of 
Leo,  Ep.  98.  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XII,  p.  72.)  For  Leo's  criticism, 
V.  supra,  §  86.  See  W.  Bright,  Notes  on  the  Canons  of  the  First  Four 
General  Councils,  1882.  A  valuable  discussion  of  the  canon  in  its 
historical  setting  is  in  Hergenrother,  Photius,  Patriarch  von  Constan- 
tinopel,  1867,  I,  74-89. 

Texts  of  the  canon  may  be  found  in  Kirch,  n.  868,  and  Hefele,  loc.  cit. 

Following  in  all  things  the  decisions  of  the  holy  Fathers, 
and  acknowledging  the  canon,  which  has  just  been  read,  of 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  bishops,  beloved  of  God,  we  also 
do  enact  and  decree  the  same  things  concerning  the  privileges 
of  the  most  holy  Church  of  Constantinople  or  New  Rome. 
For  the  Fathers  rightly  granted  privileges  to  the  throne  of 
Old  Rome,  because  it  was  the  royal  city,  and  the  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  most  religious  bishops,  moved  by  the  same 
considerations,  gave  equal  privileges  to  the  most  holy  throne 
of  New  Rome,  judging  with  good  reason  that  the  city  which  is 
honored  with  the  sovereignty  and  the  Senate,  and  also  enjoys 
equal  privileges  with  old  imperial  Rome,  should  in  ecclesias- 

'  /.  €.,  teaching  as  to  these  points  in  the  form  of  a  definition. 


522  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

tical  matters  also  be  magnified  as  she  is,  and  rank  next  after 
her;  so  that  in  the  dioceses  of  Pontus,  Asia,  and  Thrace  the 
metropoKtans,  and  such  bishops  also  of  the  dioceses  afore- 
said as  are  among  the  barbarians,  should  be  ordained  only  by 
the  aforesaid  most  holy  throne  of  the  most  holy  Church  of 
Constantinople;  every  metropohtan  of  the  aforesaid  dioceses 
together  with  the  bishops  of  his  province  ordaining  bishops 
of  the  province,  as  has  been  declared  by  the  divine  canons; 
but  that,  as  has  been  said  above,  the  metropoKtans  of  the 
aforesaid  dioceses  shall  be  ordained  by  the  archbishop  of 
Constantinople,  after  the  proper  elections  have  been  held  ac- 
cording to  custom  and  have  been  reported  to  him. 

(e)  Council  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  Protests  of  the  Legates 
of  Leo  against  Canon  28.     Mansi,  VII,  446. 

Lucentius,  the  bishop  [legate  of  Leo],  said:  The  ApostoKc 
See  gave  orders  that  all  things  should  be  done  in  our  presence 
[Latin  text:  The  ApostoHc  See  ought  not  to  be  humihated  in 
our  presence],  and  therefore  whatever  was  done  yesterday 
during  our  absence,  to  the  prejudice  of  the  canons,  we  pray 
your  highnesses  [i.  e.,  the  royal  commissioners  who  directed 
the  affairs  of  the  council]  to  command  to  be  rescinded.  But 
if  not,  let  our  protest  be  placed  in  these  acts  [i.  e.,  the  minutes 
of  the  council  then  being  approved],  so  that  we  may  know 
clearly  what  we  are  to  report  to  that  apostolic  and  chief 
bishop  of  the  whole  Church  [Latin  text:  to  that  apostolic  man 
and  Pope  of  the  universal  Church],  so  that  he  may  be  able  to 
take  action  with  regard  either  to  the  indignity  done  to  his 
see  or  to  the  setting  at  naught  of  the  canons. 

§  91.    Results  of  the  Decision  of  Chalcedon:  the  Rise 
OF  Schisms  from  the  Monophysite  Controversy 

The  definition  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  in  spite  of  its 
condemnation  of  Nestorius  and  its  approval  of  the  letters  of 
Cyril,  was  a  triumph  of  the  Antiochian  school  and  a  condem- 


THE  RESULTS  OF   CHALCEDON  523 

nation  of  Alexandrian  theology.  At  Chalcedon  no  more  than 
at  Nic2ea  was  a  controversy  settled.  So  far  from  being  settled 
at  the  council,  Monophysitism  began  with  it  its  long  career 
in  the  Eastern  Church  only  to  end  in  permanent  schisms. 
As  soon  as  the  results  of  Chalcedon  were  known  the  Church 
was  in  an  uproar.  Riots  broke  out  in  Jerusalem  against  the 
patriarch.  At  Alexandria,  Timothy  ^lurus,  a  Monophysite, 
was  able  to  drive  out  the  orthodox  patriarch.  In  Antioch, 
Petrus  Fullo  did  the  same  and  added  to  the  liturgical  Trisa- 
gion  [Is.  6:3]  the  Theopaschite  phrase:  "God  who  was 
crucified  for  us."  The  Emperor  Marcian  died  457  and  was 
succeeded  by  Leo  I  (457-474).  His  grandson  Leo  II  (474) 
was  succeeded  by  his  father  Zeno  (474-475,  477-491).  Zeno 
was  temporarily  deposed  by  Basiliscus  (475-477),  who,  basing 
his  authority  upon  the  Monophysite  faction,  issued  an 
Encyclion  condemning  Chalcedon  and  Leo's  Epistle,  and  mak- 
ing Monophysitism  the  religion  of  the  Empire.  Zeno  was 
restored  by  a  Dyophysite  faction  under  the  lead  of  Acacius, 
patriarch  of  Constantinople.  Zeno,  to  win  back  the  Mono- 
physites,  issued  in  482  the  Henoticon,  setting  aside  Chalce- 
don and  making  only  the  definition  of  Nicaea  authoritative. 
Dissatisfaction  arose  on  both  sides,  and  minor  schisms  in  the 
East  took  place.  With  Rome  a  schism  arose  lasting  484-519. 
Additional  source  material:  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  lib.  III. 

(a)  Basiliscus,  Encyclion;  A.  D.  476;  in  Evagrius,  Hist. 
Ec,  III,  4.     (MSG,  86,  II  :  2600.)     C/.  Kirch,  nn.  879/. 

Although  an  anti-encyclion  was  issued  in  477  condemning  Eutyches 
as  well  as  Nestorius,  the  attempts  of  Basiliscus  were  in  vain. 

The  Emperor  Caesar  Basiliscus,  pious,  victorious,  trium- 
phant, supreme,  ever-worshipful  Augustus,  and  Marcus,  the 
most  noble  Caesar,  to  Timotheus,  archbishop  of  the  great  city 
of  the  Alexandrians,  most  reverend  and  beloved  of  God. 

Whatever  laws  the  pious  emperors  before  us,  who  wor- 
shipped the  blessed  and  immortal  and  life-giving  Trinity,  have 
decreed  in  behalf  of  the  true  and  apostolic  faith,  these  laws. 


524  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

we  say,  as  always  beneficial  for  the  whole  world,  we  will  at 
no  time  to  be  inoperative,  but  rather  we  promulgate  them  as 
our  own.  We,  preferring  piety  and  zeal  in  the  cause  of  our 
God  and  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  who  created  and  has  made  us 
glorious  before  all  diligence  in  human  affairs,  and  also  believ- 
ing that  concord  among  the  flocks  of  Christ  is  the  preservation 
of  ourselves  and  our  subjects,  the  firm  foundation  and  un- 
shaken bulwark  of  our  Empire,  and,  accordingly,  being  rightly 
moved  with  godly  zeal  and  offering  to  God  and  our  Saviour, 
Jesus  Christ,  the  unity  of  the  holy  Church  as  the  first-fruits  of 
our  reign,  do  ordain  as  the  basis  and  confirmation  of  human 
feHcity,  namely,  the  symbol  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen 
holy  Fathers  who  were  in  time  past  assembled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  at  Nicaea,  into  which  both  ourselves  and  all  our  behev- 
ing  subjects  were  baptized ;  that  this  alone  should  have  recep- 
tion and  authority  with  the  orthodox  people  in  all  the  most 
holy  churches  of  God  as  the  only  formulary  of  the  right  faith, 
and  sufficient  for  the  utter  destruction  of  all  heresy  and  for 
the  complete  unity  of  the  holy  churches  of  God ;  the  acts  of 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  holy  Fathers  assembled  in  this 
imperial  city,  in  confirmation  of  the  sacred  symbol  itself  and 
in  condemnation  of  those  who  blasphemed  against  the  Holy 
Ghost,  retaining  their  own  force;  as  well  as  of  all  done  in  the 
metropoKtan  city  of  the  Ephesians  against  the  impious  Nes- 
torius  and  those  who  subsequently  favored  his  opinions.^  But 
the  proceedings  which  have  disturbed  the  unity  and  good 
order  of  the  holy  churches  of  God,  and  the  peace  of  the  whole 
world,  that  is  to  say,  the  so-called  Tome  of  Leo,  and  all  things 
done  at  Chalcedon  in  innovation  upon  the  before-mentioned 
holy  symbol  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers, 
whether  by  way  of  definition  of  the  faith  or  setting  forth  of 
symbols,  or  interpretation,  or  instruction,  or  discourse;  we 
decree  that  these  shall  be  anathematized  both  here  and  every- 
where by  all  the  most  holy  bishops  in  every  church  and  shall 
be  given  to  the  flames  by  whomsoever  they  shall  be  found, 

^  It  is  to  be  noted  that  condemnation  of  Eutyches  is  not  confirmed. 


THE   RESULTS   OF   CHALCEDON  525 

insomuch  as  it  was  so  enjoined  respecting  all  heretical  doc- 
trines by  our  predecessors  of  pious  and  blessed  memory, 
Constantine  and  Theodosius  the  younger  [v.  supra,  §  73], 
and  that,  having  thus  been  rendered  null,  they  shall  be  utterly 
cast  out  from  the  one  and  only  Catholic  and  ApostoHc  Ortho- 
dox Church,  as  superseding  the  everlasting  and  saving  defini- 
tions of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  Fathers,  and  those  of 
the  blessed  Fathers  who,  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  decreed  at  Ephe- 
sus  [it  is  possible  that  there  is  a  fault  in  the  text  here;  the 
expected  reading  of  the  passage  would  be:  and  of  the  one 
hundred  and  fifty  bishops  who  decreed  concerning  the  Holy 
Spirit;  and  of  those  who  were  assembled  at  Ephesus]  that 
no  one,  either  of  the  priesthood  or  laity,  be  allowed  to 
deviate  in  any  respect  from  that  most  sacred  constitution 
of  the  holy  symbol,  and  we  decree  that  these  be  anathema- 
tized together  with  all  the  innovations  upon  the  sacred  sym- 
bol which  were  made  at  Chalcedon  and  the  heresy  of  those 
who  do  not  confess  that  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  was 
truly  incarnate  and  made  man  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  the 
holy  and  ever-virgin  Mary,  Theotokos,  but  falsely  allege  that 
either  from  heaven  or  in  mere  phantasy  and  seeming  He  took 
flesh;  and,  in  short,  every  heresy  and  whatever  else  at  any 
time  in  any  manner  or  place  in  the  whole  world,  in  either 
thought  or  word,  has  been  devised  as  an  innovation  upon 
and  in  derogation  of  the  sacred  symbol.  And  inasmuch  as  it 
belongs  especially  to  imperial  providence  to  furnish  to  their 
subjects,  with  forecasting  deliberation,  security  not  only  for 
the  present  but  for  the  future,  we  decree  that  everywhere 
the  most  holy  bishops  shall  subscribe  to  this  our  sacred  cir- 
cular letter  when  exhibited  to  them,  and  shall  distinctly  de- 
clare that  they  submit  to  the  sacred  symbol  of  the  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  holy  Fathers  alone,  which  the  one  hundred 
and  fifty  holy  Fathers  confirmed,  as  it  was  also  defined  by  the 
most  holy  Fathers  who  subsequently  assembled  in  the  metro- 
politan city  of  the  Ephesians,  that  they  should  submit  to  the 
sacred  symbol  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers, 


526  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

as  the  definition  of  faith,  and  shall  anathematize  everything 
done  at  Chalcedon  as  an  offence  to  the  orthodox  people  and 
utterly  cast  it  out  of  the  churches  as  an  impediment  to  the 
general  happiness  and  our  own.^  Those,  moreover,  who  after 
the  issuing  of  this  our  sacred  letter,  which  we  trust  has  been 
issued  according  to  God,  in  an  endeavor  to  bring  about  that 
unity  which  all  desire  for  the  holy  churches  of  God,  shall  at- 
tempt to  bring  forward  or  so  much  as  to  name  the  innova- 
tion upon  the  faith  made  at  Chalcedon,  either  in  discourse, 
instruction,  or  writing,  in  whatsoever  manner  or  place — 
those  persons,  as  the  cause  of  confusion  and  tumult  in  the 
churches  of  God  and  among  the  whole  body  of  our  subjects, 
and  as  enemies  of  God  and  to  our  safety,  we  command 
(in  accordance  with  the  laws  ordained  by  our  predecessor 
Theodosius,  of  blessed  and  pious  memory,  against  such  sorts 
of  evil  designs,  which  laws  are  subjoined  to  this  our  sacred 
circular)  that,  if  they  be  bishops  or  clergy,  they  be  deposed; 
if  monks  or  laymen,  that  they  be  subjected  to  banishment 
and  every  mode  of  confiscation  and  the  severest  penalties. 
For  so  the  holy  and  homoousian  Trinity,  the  Creator  and 
Life-giver  of  the  universe,  which  has  ever  been  adored  by  us 
in  piety,  now  also  is  served  by  us  in  the  destruction  of  the 
before-mentioned  tares  and  the  confirmation  of  the  true  and 
apostolic  traditions  of  the  holy  symbol,  becoming  favorable 
and  gracious  both  to  our  souls  and  to  every  one  of  our  sub- 
jects, shall  ever  aid  us  and  preserve  in  peace  human  affairs. 

(b)  Zeno,  Henoticon;  in  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  14.  (MSG, 
86,  n  :  2620.)     Cf.  Kirch,  nn.  883  /. 

Zeno  published  his  Henoticon  in  482  as  an  attempt  to  win  back  the 
Monophysites.  Evagrius  says,  in  a  note  to  the  document:  "When 
these  things  were  read,  those  who  were  in  Alexandria  were  joined  to  the 
holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church."  The  effect  so  far  as  the  West 
went  was  just  the  opposite.  Felix  III  protested  and  threatened.  But 
Acacius,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  who  was  chiefly  responsible  for  the 
document,  refused  to  listen.     Felix  {cf.  Evagrius,  III,  18)  and  Acacius 

^This  left  the  theological  situation  precisely  as  it  was  after  the  "Latroci- 
nium  Ephesinum  "  of  449. 


THE  RESULTS  OF  CHALCEDON  527 

thereupon  issued  mutual  excommunications.  On  the  accession  of 
the  Emperor  Anastasius  [491-518]  the  Henoticon  continued  in  force, 
as  his  sympathies  were  with  the  Monophysites.  It  will  be  noted  that 
the  Henoticon  not  merely  sets  aside  Chalcedon  but  introduces  phrases 
which  make  it  appear  that  the  same  moral  subject  is  present  in  every 
act,  whether  of  humility  or  majesty,  and  that  it  is  God  who  suffers. 
These  are  characteristic  Monophysite  positions. 

The  Emperor  Csesar  Zeno,  pious,  victorious,  triumphant, 
supreme,  ever-worshipful  Augustus,  to  the  most  reverend 
bishops  and  clergy,  and  to  the  monks  and  laity  throughout 
Alexandria,  Egypt,  Libya,  and  PentapoHs. 

Being  assured  that  the  origin  and  constitution,  the  might 
and  invincible  shield  of  our  sovereignty,  is  the  only  right  and 
true  faith,  which  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers 
assembled  at  Nicaea  set  forth  by  divine  inspiration,  and  the 
one  hundred  and  fifty  holy  Fathers  who  in  like  manner  met 
at  Constantinople,  confirmed;  we  night  and  day  employ 
every  means  of  prayer,  of  zealous  care,  and  of  laws,  that  the 
holy  CathoHc  and  Apostolic  Church  of  God  in  every  place 
may  be  multipKed,  which  is  the  incorruptible  and  immortal 
mother  of  our  sceptre;  and  that  the  pious  laity,  continuing 
in  peace  and  unanimity  in  respect  to  God,  may,  together  with 
the  bishops,  highly  beloved  of  God,  the  most  pious  clergy, 
the  archimandrites,  and  monks,  offer  up  acceptably  their  sup- 
plications in  behalf  of  our  sovereignty.  So  long  as  our  great 
God  and  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  who  was  made  man  and 
brought  forth  of  Mary,  the  holy  Virgin  and  Theotokos,  ap- 
proves and  readily  accepts  the  praise  we  render  by  concord 
and  our  service,  the  power  of  enemies  will  be  crushed  and 
swept  away,  and  all  will  bend  their  necks  to  our  power,  which 
is  according  to  God,  and  peace  and  its  blessings,  kindly  tem- 
perature, abundant  produce,  and  whatever  else  is  beneficial 
will  be  liberally  bestowed  upon  men.  Since,  then,  the  irrep- 
rehensible  faith  is  the  preserver  of  both  ourselves  and  Roman 
affairs,  petitions  have  been  offered  to  us  from  pious  archi- 
mandrites and  hermits  and  other  venerable  persons,  implor- 
ing with  tears  that  there  be  unity  for  the  most  holy  churches. 


528  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  .500 

and  the  parts  should  be  joined  to  parts  which  the  enemy  of 
all  good  has  of  old  time  attempted  to  keep  apart,  knowing 
that,  if  he  assails  the  body  of  the  Church  sound  and  complete, 
he  will  be  defeated.  For,  since  it  happens  that  of  unnumbered 
generations  which  during  the  lapse  of  so  many  years  in  time 
have  withdrawn  from  life,  some  have  departed  deprived  of 
the  laver  of  regeneration,  and  others  have  been  borne  away 
on  the  inevitable  journey  of  man  without  having  partaken  of 
the  divine  communion;  and  innumerable  murders  have  also 
been  committed;  and  not  only  the  earth,  but  the  very  air 
has  been  filled  by  a  multitude  of  blood-sheddings,  who  would 
not  pray  that  this  state  of  things  might  be  transformed  into 
good?  For  this  reason  we  were  anxious  that  you  should  know 
that  neither  we  nor  the  churches  everywhere  have  ever 
held  or  shall  hold,  nor  are  we  aware  of  any  persons  who 
hold,  any  other  symbol  or  teaching  or  definition  of  faith  or 
creed  than  the  aforementioned  holy  symbol  of  the  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  holy  Fathers,  which  the  aforesaid  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  holy  Fathers  confirmed.  If  any  person  should 
hold  such,  we  regard  him  as  an  aHen;  for  we  are  confident 
that  this  symbol  alone  is,  as  we  said,  the  preserver  of  our  sov- 
ereignty. And  all  the  people  desiring  the  saving  illumina- 
tion were  baptized,  receiving  this  faith  only,  and  this  the  holy 
Fathers  assembled  at  Ephesus  also  followed;  who  deposed 
the  impious  Nestorius  and  those  who  subsequently  held  his 
sentiments.  And  this  Nestorius  we  also  anathematize,  to- 
gether with  Eutyches  and  all  who  entertain  opinions  contrary 
to  the  above-mentioned,  receiving  at  the  same  time  the  twelve 
chapters  of  Cyril,  of  holy  memory,  formerly  archbishop  of 
the  holy  CathoHc  Church  of  the  Alexandrians.  We  confess, 
moreover,  that  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  himself  God, 
who  truly  became  man,  namely,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is 
consubstantial  with  the  Father  as  to  his  godhead,  and  the 
same  consubstantial  with  ourselves  as  respects  his  manhood; 
that  having  descended  and  become  flesh  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  Mary,  the  Virgin  and  Theo tokos.  He  is  one  and  not  two; 


THE   CHURCH   UNDER    THE   OSTROGOTHS     529 

for  we  affirm  that  both  His  miracles  and  the  sufferings  which 
He  voluntarily  endured  in  the  flesh,  are  of  one;  for  we  do 
not  in  any  degree  admit  those  who  either  make  a  division 
or  a  confusion  or  introduce  a  phantom;  inasmuch  as  His 
truly  sinless  incarnation  from  the  Theotokos  did  not  produce 
an  addition  of  a  son,  because  the  Trinity  continued  as  a 
Trinity,  even  when  one  of  the  Trinity,  God  the  Word,  did 
become  incarnate.  Knowing,  then,  that  neither  the  holy 
orthodox  churches  of  God  in  all  places  nor  the  priests,  highly 
beloved  of  God,  who  are  at  their  head,  nor  our  own  sover- 
eignty, have  allowed  or  do  allow  any  other  symbol  or  defini- 
tion of  faith  than  the  before-mentioned  holy  teaching,  we 
have  united  ourselves  thereunto  without  hesitation.  And 
these  things  we  write,  not  as  making  an  innovation  upon  the 
faith,  but  to  satisfy  you;  and  every  one  who  has  held  or 
holds  any  other  opinion,  either  at  the  present  or  at  another 
time,  whether  at  Chalcedon  or  in  any  synod  whatever,  we 
anathematize;  and  specially  the  aforementioned  Nestorius 
and  Eutyches,  and  those  who  maintain  their  doctrines.  Link 
yourselves,  therefore,  to  the  spiritual  mother,  the  Church,  and 
in  her  enjoy  divine  communion  with  us,  according  to  the 
aforesaid  one  and  only  definition  of  the  faith  of  the  three 
hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers.  For  your  all-holy 
mother,  the  Church,  waits  to  embrace  you  as  true  children, 
and  longs  to  hear  your  gentle  voice  so  long  withheld.  Speed 
yourselves,  therefore,  for  by  so  doing  you  will  both  draw 
toward  yourselves  the  favor  of  our  Master  and  Saviour  and 
God,  Jesus  Christ,  and  be  commended  by  our  sovereignty. 

§  92.  The  Church  of  Italy  under  the  Ostrogoths  and 
during  the  first  schism  between  rome  and  the 
Eastern  Church 

The  schism  between  New  and  Old  Rome  lasted  from  484  to 
517,  but  attempts  were  made  on  both  sides  to  end  the  de- 
plorable situation.     The  two  successors  of  Acacius  were  will- 


530  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

ing  to  resume  communion  with  Rome  and  restore  the  name  of 
the  bishop  of  Rome  to  the  diptychs,  but  refused  to  take  the 
names  of  their  predecessors  from  the  same,  as  required  by  the 
latter.  Gelasius  (492-496),  Anastasius  II  (496-498),  and 
Symmachus  (498-514)  held  firmly  but  unavailingly  to  the 
Roman  contention  that,  before  any  communion  was  possible, 
the  name  of  Acacius  must  be  struck  from  the  diptychs — in 
the  case  of  the  dead  an  act  as  condemnatory  as  excommuni- 
cation in  the  case  of  the  living.  Meanwhile  the  Roman  see 
boldly  asserted  the  independence  of  the  Church,  and  protested 
against  the  action  of  the  Emperor  in  setting  aside  the  decree 
of  Chalcedon  as  usurpation  and  tyranny.  This  is  most  clearly 
set  forth  by  Gelasius,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Emperor  Anastasius. 
The  schism  finally  came  to  an  end  in  519,  in  accordance  with 
the  ecclesiastical  policy  of  Justinian,  and  at  that  time  the 
Formula  of  Hormisdas  (514-523)  was  accepted  by  the  heads 
of  the  Eastern  Church  by  an  act  constituting  a  complete  sur- 
render of  the  claims  of  the  Orientals. 

While  the  schism  was  still  existing  and  Rome  was  treating 
with  the  East  upon  an  independent  footing,  the  situation 
in  Italy  was  far  less  brilliant.  The  Arian  king,  the  Ostro- 
goth Theodoric  (489,  493-526)  ruled  Italy,  and  the  attitude 
of  the  Roman  see  was  far  less  authoritative  toward  the  local 
ruler.  It  was,  however,  a  period  of  great  importance  for  the 
future  of  the  Church;  Boethius,  Cassiodorus,  Dionysius  Ex- 
iguus,  and  Benedict  of  Nursia  {v.  infra,  §§  104,  105)  all 
belong  to  this  period  and  the  decree  of  Gelasius,  De  Recipi- 
endis  Libris,  was  of  permanent  influence  upon  the  theologi- 
cal science  of  the  West. 

Additional  source  material:  Cassiodorus,  Varia,  Eng.  trans,  (con- 
densed), by  T.  Hodgkin  {The  Letters  of  Cassiodorus),  London,  1886. 

(a)  Gelasius,  Ep.  ad  Imp.  Anastasium.     (MSL,  59  :  42.) 

A  definition  of  the  relation  between  the  secular  and  religious  au- 
thority. 

The  date  of  this  epistle  is  494.  The  period  is  not  dealt  with  at  any 
length  in  English  works  on  ecclesiastical  history;  see,  however,  T. 


THE  CHURCH  UNDER  THE  OSTROGOTHS    531 

Greenwood,  Cathedra  Petri,  II,  pp.  41-84,  the  chapter  entitled  ''Papal 
Prerogative  under  Popes  Gelasius  and  Symmachus." 

After  Gelasius  has  alluded  to  the  circumstances  in  which  he  is  writ- 
ing and  excused  his  not  writing,  he  mentions  his  natural  devotion  to  the 
Roman  Emperor — being  himself  by  birth  a  Roman  citizen — his  desire  as 
a  Christian  to  share  with  him  the  right  faith,  and  as  vicar  of  the  ApostoHc 
See  his  constant  anxiety  to  maintain  the  true  faith;  he  then  proceeds: 

I  beseech  your  piety  not  to  regard  as  arrogance  duty  in 
divine  affairs.  Far  be  it  from  a  Roman  prince,  I  pray,  to 
regard  as  injury  truth  that  has  been  intimated  to  him.  For, 
indeed,  there  are,  O  Emperor  Augustus,  two  by  whom  prin- 
cipally this  world  is  ruled :  the  sacred  authority  of  the  pontiffs 
and  the  royal  power.  Of  these  the  importance  of  the  priests 
is  so  much  the  greater,  as  even  for  kings  of  men  they  will  have 
to  give  an  account  in  the  divine  judgment.  Know,  indeed, 
most  clement  son,  that  although  you  worthily  rule  over  the 
human  race,  yet  as  a  man  of  devotion  in  divine  matters  you 
submit  your  neck  to  the  prelates,  and  also  from  them  you 
await  the  matters  of  your  salvation,  and  in  making  use  of  the 
celestial  sacraments  and  in  administering  those  things  you 
know  that  you  ought,  as  is  right,  to  be  subjected  to  the  order 
of  rehgion  rather  than  preside  over  it;  know  likewise  that 
in  regard  to  these  things  you  are  dependent  upon  their 
judgment  and  you  should  not  bend  them  to  your  will.  For 
if,  so  far  as  it  pertains  to  the  order  of  public  discipline,  the 
priests  of  religion,  knowing  that  the  imperial  power  has  been 
bestowed  upon  you  by  divine  providence,  obey  your  laws, 
lest  in  affairs  of  exclusively  mundane  determination  they 
might  seem  to  resist,  with  how  much  more  gladness,  I  ask, 
does  it  become  you  to  obey  them  who  have  been  assigned  to 
the  duty  of  performing  the  divine  mysteries.  Just  as  there 
is  no  Hght  risk  for  the  pontiffs  to  be  silent  about  those  things 
which  belong  to  the  service  of  the  divinity,  so  there  is  no 
small  peril  (which  God  forbid)  to  those  who,  when  they  ought 
to  obey,  refuse  to  do  so.  And  if  it  is  right  that  the  hearts  of 
the  faithful  be  submitted  to  all  priests  generally  who  treat 


532  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

rightly  divine  things,  how  much  more  is  obedience  to  be  shown 
to  the  prelate  of  that  see  which  the  highest  divinity  wished 
to  be  pre-eminent  over  all  priests  and  which  the  devotion  of 
the  whole  Church  continually  honors? 

(b)  Gelasius,  Epist.  de  Recipiendis  et  non  Recipiendis  Lihris. 
Mansi,  VHI,  153/. 

This  decretal  is  evidently  made  of  matter  of  different  dates,  as  has 
been  shown  by  Hefele,  §  217,  and  probably  contains  matter  which  may- 
be later  than  Gelasius.  In  the  first  section  of  the  decretal  is  a  list  of 
the  canonical  books  of  the  Bible,  as  in  the  Vulgate;  the  decretal 
then  sets  forth  the  claims  of  the  Roman  see  (§  2),  the  books  to  be  re- 
ceived (§  3),  and  the  books  which  the  Roman  Church  rejects  (§  4). 
In  respect  to  several  there  are  various  comments  added,  but  these 
have  in  several  cases  been  omitted  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  where  they 
are  of  less  importance.  Portions  of  the  decretal  in  Denziger,  nn.  162- 
164;  the  full  text  of  the  decretal  may  be  found  in  Mansi  VIII,  153  f. 
Preuschen,  Analecta,  vol.  II,  pp.  52  J".;  Mirbt,  n.  168. 

II.  Although  the  one  dwelling  of  the  universal  Catholic 
Church  spread  through  the  world  is  of  Christ,  the  holy  Roman 
Church,  however,  has  been  placed  before  the  other  churches 
by  no  synodical  decrees,  but  has  obtained  the  primacy  by 
the  evangeHc  voice  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  saying,  "Thou 
art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church, "  etc.^ 
To  it  was  given  the  fellowship  of  the  most  blessed  Apostle 
Paul,  that  chosen  vessel  who  not  at  a  different  time,  as  here- 
tics prate,  but  at  one  time  and  on  one  and  the  same  day  by 
a  glorious  death,  was  crowned  together  with  Peter  in  agony 
in  the  city  of  Rome  under  the  Emperor  Nero.  And  they 
equally  consecrated  the  said  holy  Roman  Church  to  Christ 
and  placed  it  over  all  the  others  in  the  whole  world  by  their 
presence  and  venerable  triumph. 

III.  Therefore  the  first  see  of  Peter  the  Apostle  is  the 
Roman  Church,  not  having  any  spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such 
thing.  The  second  see  was  consecrated  at  Alexandria  in  the 
name  of  the  blessed  Peter  by  Mark,  his  disciple  and  the  evange- 
list.   He  himself,  having  been  directed  by  the  Apostle  Peter 

iMatt.  16:18/. 


THE   CHURCH  UNDER  THE    OSTROGOTHS     533 

to  Egypt,  preached  the  word  of  truth  and  consummated  a 
glorious  martyrdom.  But  as  the  third  see  of  the  same  most 
blessed  Apostle  Peter  is  held  the  see  of  Antioch,  since  he  held 
that  before  he  came  to  Rome,  and  there  the  name  of  the  new 
people,  the  name  of  Christians,  arose. 

IV,  I .  And  although  no  other  foundation  can  be  laid  than 
that  which  has  been  laid,  which  is  Christ  Jesus,  yet  after  the 
writings  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,^  which  we  receive 
regularly,  the  same  holy  Roman  Church  does  not  prohibit 
these  following  writings  to  be  received  for  the  purposes  of 
edification : 

2.  The  holy  synod  of  Nicsea,  according  to  the  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  Fathers,  under  the  Emperor  Constantine. 

3.  The  holy  synod  of  Ephesus,  in  which  Nestorius  was 
condemned  with  the  consent  of  the  most  blessed  Pope  [papa] 
Celestine,  held  under  Cyril,  the  prelate  of  the  see  of  Alex- 
andria, and  Acadius,  a  bishop  sent  from  Italy. 

4.  The  holy  synod  of  Chalcedon,  which  was  held  under 
the  Emperor  Marcian  and  AnatoKus,  bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople, and  in  which  Nestorius,  Eutyches,  and  Dioscurus  were 
condemned. 

V,  I.  Likewise  the  works  of  the  blessed  Caecilius  Cyp- 
rianus,  martyr,  and  bishop  of  Carthage;  2.  ...  of  Gregory 
the  bishop  of  Nazianzus;  3.  ...  of  Basil,  bishop  of  Cap- 
padocia;  4.  ...  of  Athanasius,  bishop  of  Alexandria;  5.  .  .  . 
of  John  [Chrysostom],  bishop  of  Constantinople;  6.  ...  of 
Theophilus,  bishop  of  Alexandria;  7.  .  .  .of  Cyril,  bishop 
of  Alexandria;  8.  ...  of  Hilary,  bishop  of  Poitiers;  9.  .  .  . 
of  Ambrose,  bishop  of  Milan;  10.  .  .  .  of  Augustine,  bishop 
of  Hippo;  II.  .  .  .of  Jerome,  the  presbyter;  12.  ...  of 
Prosper;  13.  .  .  .  likewise  the  Epistle  of  the  blessed  Pope  Leo 
to  Flavian,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  against  Eutyches  and 
other  heretics;    and  if  any  one  dispute  even  so  much  as  an 

^  The  list  is  given  in  the  early  part  of  the  epistle  not  here  given;  see  Preuschen, 
loc.  cit. 


534  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

iota  of  the  text  of  the  epistle,  and  will  not  reverently  receive 
it  in  all  points,  let  him  be  anathema. 

14.  Likewise  the  works  and  treatises  of  the  orthodox 
Fathers  are  to  be  read,  who  in  no  respect  have  deviated  from 
the  union  w^ith  the  holy  Roman  Church,  nor  have  separated 
from  its  faith  and  teaching;  but,  by  the  grace  of  God,  have 
shared  in  communion  with  it  even  to  the  last  days  of  their  Hfe. 

15.  Likewise  the  decretal  epistles  which  the  most  blessed 
Popes  at  different  times  have  given  from  the  city  of  Rome, 
in  reply  to  consultations  of  various  fathers,  are  to  be  rever- 
ently received. 

16.  Likewise  the  acts  of  the  holy  martyrs.  .  .  .  But,  ac- 
cording to  an  ancient  custom  and  singular  caution,  they  are 
not  to  be  read  in  the  holy  Roman  Church,  because  the  names 
of  those  who  wrote  them  are  not  known.  .  .  . 

17.  Likev/ise  the  lives  of  the  fathers  Paul,  Antony,  Hila- 
rion,  and  all  hermits  which  the  most  blessed  Jerome  has  de- 
scribed, we  receive  in  honor. 

18.  Likewise  the  acts  of  the  blessed  Sylvester,  prelate  of 
the  Apostolic  See,  although  the  name  of  the  writer  is  unknown; 
however,  we  know  that  it  is  read  by  many  Catholics  in  the 
city  of  Rome,  and  on  account  of  its  ancient  use  many 
churches  have  copied  it. 

19.  Likewise  the  writing  concerning  the  discovery  of  the 
cross  and  another  concerning  the  discovery  of  the  head  of  the 
blessed  John  the  Baptist.  ... 

20.  Rufinus,  a  most  religious  man,  has  published  many 
books  on  ecclesiastical  affairs  and  has  also  translated  several 
writings.  But  because  the  venerable  Jerome  has  criticised 
him  in  various  points  for  his  freedom  in  judgment,  we  are  of 
the  same  opinion  as  we  know  Jerome  is,  and  not  only  con- 
cerning Rufinus  but  all  others  whom,  out  of  zeal  toward  God 
and  devotion  to  the  faith,  Jerome  has  condemned. 

21.  Likewise  several  works  of  Origen  which  the  blessed 
Jerome  does  not  reject  we  receive  as  to  be  read;  the  remaining 
works  along  with  their  author  we  declare  are  to  be  rejected. 


THE   CHURCH   UNDER  THE    OSTROGOTHS     535 

22.  Likewise  the  chronicles  of  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  and 
the  books  of  his  Ecclesiastical  History,  although  in  the  first 
book  of  his  narrative  he  has  been  a  little  warm  and  afterward 
he  wrote  one  book  in  praise  and  defence  of  Origen,  the  schis- 
matic, yet  on  account  of  the  mention  of  several  things,  which 
pertain  to  instruction,  we  say  that  they  are  to  that  extent 
not  to  be  rejected.  .  .  . 

23.  Likewise  we  approve  Orosius;  24.  .  .  .  the  works  of 
Sedulius;    25.  .  .  .  the  works  of  Juvencus.  .  .  . 

VI.  Other  works  which  have  been  written  by  heretics  or 
schismatics  the  CathoUc  and  Apostolic  Roman  Church  in  no 
respect  receives,  and  these,  although  they  are  not  received 
and  are  to  be  avoided  by  CathoKcs,  we  beheve  ought  to  be 
added  below. 

There  follow  a  list  of  thirty-five  apocryphal  gospels,  acts,  and 
similar  documents.     The  epistle  continues: 

36.  The  book  which  is  called  The  Canons  of  the  Apostles; 
37.  the  book  called  Physiologus,  written  by  heretics  and 
ascribed  to  Ambrose;  38.  the  history  of  Eusebius  Pamphihus; 
39.  the  works  of  Tertullian;  40.  .  .  .  of  Lactantius  or  Firmi- 
nianus;  41.  ...  of  Africanus;  42.  .  .  .  Postumianus  and 
Gallus;  43.  ...  of  Montanus,  Priscilla,  and  Maximilla; 
44.  .  .  .  all  the  works  of  Faustus  the  Manichaean;  45.  the 
works  of  Commodus;  46.  the  works  of  another  Clement 
of  Alexandria;  47.  the  works  of  Thascius  Cyprianus;  48. 
of  Arnobius;  49.  of  Tichonius;  50.  of  Cassianus  a  presby- 
ter of  Gaul;  51.  Victorinus  of  Pettau;  52.  of  Frumentius 
the  bhnd;  53.  of  Faustus  of  Reiz;  54.  the  Epistle  of  Jesus 
to  Abgar;  55.  Passion  of  St.  Cyricus  and  Julitta;  56. 
Passion  of  St.  Georgius;  57.  the  writings  which  are  called 
the  ''Curse  of  Solomon";  58.  all  phylacteries  which  have 
been  written  not  with  the  names  of  angels,  as  they  pretend, 
but  rather  of  demons;  59.  these  works  and  all  similar  to 
them  which  Simon  Magus  [a  list  of  heretics  down  to]  Peter 
[Fullo]   and  another  Peter  [Mongus],  of  whom  one  defiled 


"# 


536  THE   CHURCH  TO  ABOUT  A.  D.  500 

Alexandria  and  the  other  Antioch,  Acacius  of  Constantinople 
with  his  adherents,  as  also  all  heretics  or  disciples  of  heretics 
or  schismatics  have  taught  or  written,  whose  names  we  do  not 
remember  are  not  only  repudiated  by  the  entire  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  but  we  declare  are  bound  forever  with  an 
indissoluble  anathema  together  with  their  authors  and  fol- 
lowers of  their  authors. 

(c)  Hormisdas,  Formula.  Mansi,  VIII,  407.  Cf.  Den- 
ziger,  nn.  171/. 

The  formula  which  Hormisdas  of  Rome  (514-523)  proposed  in  515, 
and  which  was  accepted  Easter  519  by  the  patriarch  John  II  of  Con- 
stantinople and  many  other  Orientals,  and  which  ended  the  schism 
between  Rome  and  Constantinople  occasioned  by  Acacius.  As  soon 
as  this  formula  was  accepted  the  leading  Monophysites  fled  to  Egypt. 

The  beginning  of  salvation  is  to  preserve  the  rule  of  a  cor- 
rect faith  and  to  deviate  in  no  respect  from  the  constitutions 
of  the  fathers.  And  because  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  cannot  be  allowed  to  fail,  who  said,  ''Thou  art  Peter, 
and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,"  etc.  [Matt.  16 :  18], 
these  things  which  were  said  are  proved  by  the  effects  of 
things,  because  in  the  Apostohc  See  rehgion  has  always  been 
preserved  without  spot  or  blemish.  Desiring  in  no  respect  to 
be  separated  from  this  hope  and  faith,  and  following  the 
constitutions  of  the  Fathers,  we  anathematize  all  heretics, 
and  especially  the  heretic  Nestorius,  who  was  once  bishop  of 
the  city  of  Constantinople,  and  condemned  in  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  by  Pope  Celestine  and  by  the  holy  Cyril,  prelate  of 
the  city  of  Alexandria.  Likewise  we  anathematize  Eutyches 
and  Dioscurus  of  Alexandria,  condemned  in  the  holy  synod 
of  Chalcedon  which  we  follow  and  embrace;  adding  to  these 
Timotheus  the  parricide,  known  as  ^Elurus,  and  also  his 
disciple  and  follower  Peter  [Mongus],  also  Acacius,  who  re- 
mained in  the  society  of  their  communion ;  because  he  mixed 
himself  with  their  communion  he  deserves  the  same  sen- 
tence of  condemnation  as  they;  no  less  condemning  Peter 
[Fullo]  of  Antioch  with  his  followers  and  the  followers  of  all 


THE   CHURCH  UNDER  THE   OSTROGOTHS     537 

those  above  named.  We  receive  and  approve,  therefore,  all 
the  universal  Epistles  of  Pope  Leo  which  he  wrote  concerning 
the  Christian  religion.  And  therefore,  as  we  have  said,  fol- 
lowing in  all  things  the  Apostolic  See  and  approving  all  of  its 
constitutions,  I  trust  that  I  may  be  deemed  worthy  to  be  in 
the  communion  with  you,  in  which  as  the  ApostoHc  See  de- 
clares there  is,  complete  and  true,  the  totality  of  the  Christian 
religion. 


PERIOD    III 

THE  DISSOLUTION  OF  THE  IMPERIAL  STATE 
CHURCH  AND  THE  TRANSITION  TO  THE  MID- 
DLE AGES:  FROM  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE 
SIXTH  CENTURY  TO  THE  LATTER  PART  OF 
THE  EIGHTH 

The  third  period  of  the  ancient  Church  under  the  Chris- 
tian Empire  begins  with  the  accession  of  Justin  I  (518-527), 
and  the  end  of  the  first  schism  between  Rome  and  Constan- 
tinople (519).  The  termination  of  the  period  is  not  so  clearly 
marked.  By  the  middle  and  latter  part  of  the  eighth  century, 
however,  the  imperial  Church  has  ceased  to  exist  in  its  orig- 
inal conception.  The  Church  in  the  East  has  become,  in 
great  part,  a  group  of  national  schismatic  churches  under 
Moslem  rulers,  and  only  the  largest  fragment  of  the  Church  of 
the  East  is  the  State  Church  of  the  greatly  reduced  Eastern 
empire.  In  the  West,  the  imperial  influence  has  ceased,  and 
the  Roman  see  has  allied  its  fortunes  with  the  rising  Prankish 
power,  and  the  rise  of  a  Western  empire  is  already  foreshad- 
owed. 

In  this  period,  the  imperial  ecclesiastical  system,  which 
had  begun  with  Constantine,  found  its  completion  in  the 
C^Esaropapism  which  was  definitively  established  by  Jus- 
tinian as  the  constitution  of  the  Eastern  Church.  But  at  the 
same  time  the  Monophysite  churches  seceded  and  became 
permanent  national  churches.  The  long  Christological  con- 
troversy found,  at  least  as  regards  Monophysitism,  its  settle- 
ment on  a  basis  derived  from  the  revived  Aristotelian  phi- 
losophy; and  the  mystical  piety  of  the  East,  with  its  apparatus 

538 


DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH     539 

of  hierarchy  and  sacraments,  found  its  characteristic  expres- 
sion in  the  works  of  Dionysius  the  Areopagite. 

While  in  the  East  the  Church  was  assuming  its  permanent 
form,  in  the  West  the  condition  of  the  Church  was  being  pro- 
foundly influenced  by  the  completely  changed  political  or- 
ganization of  what  had  been  the  Roman  Empire  of  the  West, 
but  was  now  parcelled  out  among  new  Germanic  nationalities. 
The  Church  in  the  various  kingdoms,  in  spite  of  its  adherence 
to  the  see  of  Rome  as  the  centre  of  Catholic  unity,  came,  to 
no  small  extent,  under  the  secular  authority,  and  Christianity 
in  Ireland,  in  Spain,  among  the  Franks,  Anglo-Saxons,  and 
even  among  the  Lombards  in  Italy  assumed  a  national  char- 
acter, coming  largely  under  the  control  and  subject  to  the  laws 
and  customs  of  the  nation.  In  this  period  were  laid  the  foun- 
dations of  the  leading  ecclesiastical  institutions  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  as  the  Church,  although  still  under  the  influence  of  an- 
tiquity, adapted  itself  and  its  institutions  to  the  changed 
condition  due  to  the  poKtical  situation  and  took  up  its  duty 
of  training  the  rude  peoples  that  had  come  within  its  fold. 

The  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  saw  the  completion  of 
the  revolution  in  the  ecclesiastical  situation.  In  the  East, 
in  the  territories  in  which  the  national  churches  of  the  Mono- 
physites  were  estabhshed,  the  Moslem  rule  protected  them 
from  the  attempts  of  the  orthodox  emperors  to  enforce  uni- 
formity. The  attempts  made  to  recover  their  allegiance  be- 
fore they  succumbed  to  Islam  had  only  ended  in  a  serious 
dispute  within  the  Orthodox  Church,  the  Monothelete  con- 
troversy, which  ended  in  the  Sixth  General  Council  of  681. 
In  Italy  the  Arian  Lombards  were  gradually  won  to  the  Catho- 
lic faith,  but  the  Roman  see  soon  found  itself  embarrassed  by 
the  too  near  secular  authority.  Accordingly,  when  the  con- 
troversy with  the  East  over  Iconoclasm  broke  out,  the  Roman 
Church  became  practically  independent  of  the  Eastern  im- 
perial authority,  and  in  its  conflict  with  the  Lombards  came 
into  alliance  with  the  rising  Frankish  power.  With  this,  the 
transition  to  the  Middle  Ages  may  be  said  to  have  been  com- 


540    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

pleted.  It  was,  however,  only  the  last  of  a  series  of  acts 
whereby  the  Church  was  severing  itself  from  the  ancient 
order  and  coming  into  closer  alliance  with  the  new  order  in 
the  life  of  the  West.  Henceforth  the  Church,  which  found 
its  centre  in  the  Roman  see,  belongs  to  the  West,  and  its  rela- 
tions to  the  East,  although  no  formal  schism  had  occurred, 
are  of  continued  and  increasing  estrangement  or  alienation. 

The  Cambridge  Medieval  History,  vol.  II,  will  cover  the  entire  period 
and  give  ample  bibliographical  references. 


CHAPTER  I.    THE   CHURCH  IN  THE   EASTERN 
EMPIRE 

The  century  extending  from  the  accession  of  Justin  I  (518- 
528)  to  the  end  of  the  Persian  wars  of  Heraclius  (610-641), 
or  from  518  to  628,  is  the  most  brilliant  period  of  the  Eastern 
Empire.  The  rise  of  Islam  had  not  yet  taken  place,  whereby 
the  best  provinces  in  Asia  and  Africa  were  cut  off  from  the 
Empire.  A  large  part  of  the  West  was  recovered  under 
Justinian,  and  under  HeracHus  the  power  of  Persia,  the  an- 
cient enemy  of  the  Roman  Empire,  which  had  been  a  menace 
since  the  latter  part  of  the  third  century,  was  completely 
overthrown  in  the  most  brilliant  series  of  campaigns  since  the 
foundation  of  the  Roman  Empire.  With  the  death  of  Justin 
II  (565-578),  the  family  of  Justin  came  to  an  end  after  oc- 
cupying the  throne  for  sixty  years.  But  under  Tiberius  (578- 
582)  and  Maurice  (582-602)  the  policy  of  Justinian  was  con- 
tinued in  all  essentials  in  the  stereotyped  form  known  as 
Byzantinism.  The  Church  became  practically  a  department 
of  the  State  and  of  the  political  machinery.  The  only  limita- 
tion upon  the  will  of  the  Emperor  was  the  determined  resist- 
ance of  the  Monophysites  and  smaller  factions.  Maurice  was 
succeeded  by  the  rude  Phocas  (602-610),  whom  a  miHtary 
revolution  placed  upon  the  throne,  and  who  instituted  a  reign 
of  terror  and  blood.  Upon  his  downfall,  Heraclius  (610-641) 
ascended  the  throne. 


THE  AGE  OF  JUSTINIAN  541 

§  93.     The  Age  of  Justinian. 

§  94.     The  Byzantine  State  Church  under  Justinian. 
§  95.     The  Definitive  Type  of  Rehgion  in  the  East:  Dio- 
nysius  the  Areopagite. 

§  93.    The  Age  of  Justinian 

Justinian  I,  the  greatest  of  all  the  rulers  of  the  Eastern  Em- 
pire, succeeded  his  uncle  Justin  I  (518-527);  but  he  had,  from 
the  beginning  of  the  latter's  reign,  exercised  an  ever-increas- 
ing influence  over  the  imperial  policy,  and  to  him  can  be 
attributed  the  direction  of  ecclesiastical  affairs  from  the  ac- 
cession of  Justin.  No  reign  among  the  Eastern  emperors  was 
more  filled  with  important  events  and  successful  undertakings. 
His  first  great  work  was  the  reduction  of  the  vast  mass  of 
Roman  law  to  what  approached  a  system.  This  was  accom- 
plished in  534,  resulting  in  the  Digest,  made  up  of  the  various 
decisions  and  opinions  of  the  most  celebrated  Roman  legal 
authorities,  the  Codex,  comprising  all  the  statute  law  then  in 
actual  force  and  apphcable  to  the  conditions  of  the  Empire, 
and  the  Institutes,  a  revision  of  the  excellent  introductory 
manual  of  Gains.  No  body  of  law  reduced  to  writing  has 
been  more  influential  in  the  history  of  the  world.  The  second 
great  undertaking,  or  series  of  undertakings,  was  the  recon- 
quest  of  the  West.  In  533  Belisarius  recovered  North  Africa 
to  the  Empire  by  the  overthrow  of  the  Vandal  kingdom.  In 
554  the  conquest  of  Italy  by  BeHsarius  and  Narses  was  com- 
pleted. Portions  of  Spain  had  also  been  recovered.  No 
Eastern  Emperor  ruled  over  a  larger  territory  than  did  Jus- 
tinian at  the  time  of  his  death.  The  third  great  line  of  work 
on  the  part  of  Justinian  was  his  regulation  of  ecclesiastical 
and  theological  matters.  In  this  he  took  an  active  personal 
part.  The  end  of  the  schism  with  the  West  had  been  brought 
about  under  the  reign  of  his  uncle.  Three  controversies  fill 
the  reign  of  Justinian:  the  Theopaschite  (519-533)  over  the 
introduction  of  the  phrase  into  the  Trisagion,  stating  that 
God  was  crucified  for  us,  so  that  the  Trisagion  read  as  fol- 


542     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

lows,  ''Holy  God,  Holy  Mighty,  Holy  Immortal,  who  was 
crucified  for  us,  have  mercy  upon  us";  the  Second  Origenistic 
controversy  (531-543)  in  which  those  elements  of  Origen's 
teaching  which  had  never  been  accepted  by  the  Church  were 
condemned  along  with  Origen  himself;  and  the  Three  Chap- 
ters controversy,  544-553,  in  which,  as  an  attempt  to  win 
back  the  Monophysites,  which  began  even  before  the  Con- 
ference with  the  Severians  in  533,  three  of  the  leading  Anti- 
ochians  were  condemned.  In  connection  with  the  two  last 
controversies,  the  Fifth  General  Council  was  held  A.  D.  553. 

Additional  source  material:  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  Lib.  IV-VI;  John 
of  Ephesus,  The  Third  Part  of  His  Ecclesiastical  History,  trans,  by  R. 
Payne  Smith,  Oxford,  i860;  Percival,  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils  (PNF). 

(a)  Justinian,  Anathematisms  against  Origen.  Mansi,  IX, 
533.     (MSG,  86:1013;  MSL,  65:221.) 

The  Origenistic  controversy  arose  in  Palestine,  where  the  learned 
monks  were  nicknamed  Origenists  by  the  more  ignorant.  The  abbot 
St.  Sabas  was  especially  opposed  to  the  group  which  had  received  this 
name.  But  several,  among  whom  the  more  important  were  Do- 
mitian  and  Theodore  Askidas,  won  the  favor  of  Justinian  and  the  latter 
received  promotion,  becoming  bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia. 
Supported  by  them,  struggles  broke  out  in  various  places  between  the 
Sabaites  and  the  Origenists.  Ephraem,  patriarch  of  Antioch,  in  a 
synodal  letter  thereupon  condemned  Origenism.  The  Origenists  tried 
in  vain  to  win  the  support  of  John,  patriarch  of  Constantinople.  But 
he  turned  to  Justinian,  who  thereupon  abandoned  the  Origenists  and 
issued  an  edict  condemning  Origen  and  his  writings,  and  appending  a 
summary  of  the  positions  condemned  in  ten  anathematisms.  Text  in 
Denziger,  nn.  203/.  Synods  were  ordered  for  the  condemnation  of  Ori- 
gen, and  among  these  was  the  synod  under  Menas,  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople, in  which  were  issued  fifteen  anathematisms  based  upon 
the  ten  of  Justinian  (Hefele,  §§  257,  258).  With  this  action,  the  contro- 
versy may  be  said  to  be  closed,  were  it  not  that  in  spite  of  the  renewed 
condemnation  at  the  Fifth  General  Council  (see  below)  disputes  and  dis- 
turbances continued  in  Palestine  until  563. 

I.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  human  souls  pre-existed, 
that  is,  that  they  had  previously  been  spirits  and  holy  powers, 
but  that  satiated  with  the  vision  of  God,  they  turned  to 
evil,  and  in  this  way  the  divine  love  in  them  became  cold 


THE  AGE  OF  JUSTINIAN  543 

[a'Tro\lrvyeL(Ta<;]  and  they  were  there  named  souls  [-^vxd^]  and 
were  condemned  to  punishment  in  bodies,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

2.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  soul  of  the  Lord  pre- 
existed and  was  united  with  God  the  Word  before  the  incarna- 
tion and  conception  of  the  Virgin,  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  body  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  was  first  formed  in  the  womb  of  the  holy  Virgin, 
and  that  afterward  there  was  united  with  it  God  the  Word 
and  the  pre-existing  soul,  let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  Word  of  God  has 
become  like  to  all  heavenly  orders,  so  that  for  the  cherubim 
He  was  a  cherub  and  for  the  seraphim  a  seraph,  in  short,  like 
all  the  superior  powers,  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that,  at  the  resurrection, 
human  bodies  will  arise  spherical  in  form  and  not  like  our 
present  form,  let  him  be  anathema. 

6.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  heavens,  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  and  the  waters  above  the  firmament  have 
souls  and  are  spiritual  and  rational  beings,  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 

7.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  Christ  the  Lord  in  a  fu- 
ture age  will  be  crucified  for  demons  as  He  was  for  men,  let 
him  be  anathema. 

8.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  power  of  God  is 
limited  and  that  He  created  only  as  much  as  He  was  able  to 
comprehend,  let  him  be  anathema. 

9.  If  any  one  says  or  thinks  that  the  punishment  of 
demons  and  impious  men  is  only  temporary  and  will  have  an 
end,  and  that  a  restoration  [apocatastasis]  will  take  place  of 
demons  and  impious  men,  let  him  be  anathema. 

10.  Let  Origen  be  anathema  together  with  that  Adaman- 
tius  who  set  forth  these  opinions  together  with  his  nefarious 
and  execrable  doctrine,  and  whoever  there  is  who  thinks  thus 
or  defends  these  opinions,  or  in  any  way  hereafter  at  any  time 
shall  presume  to  protect  them. 


544    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

(b)  Vigilius,  Judicatum.    Mansi,  IX,  i8i. 

This  important  document  was  addressed  to  Menas  of  Constanti- 
nople and  is  dated  April  ii,  548.  Unfortunately  it  exists  only  in 
detached  fragments,  which  are  given  below,  taken  from  the  text  as 
given  by  Hefele,  §  259.  The  first  is  given  in  a  letter  of  Justinian  to 
the  Fifth  Council,  an  abridgment  of  which  may  be  found  in  Hefele, 
§  267.  Other  fragments  are  from  the  Constitutum  (see  below),  where 
they  are  quoted  by  Vigilius  from  his  previous  letter  to  Menas,  which 
Hefele  has  identified  with  the  Judicatum.  In  this  opinion  Kriiger 
(art. ''  VigiUus  "  in  PRE),  and  Bailey  (art. "  VigiHus  "  in  DCB)  and  other 
scholars  concur.  The  force  of  the  first  is  that  the  writings  condemned 
by  the  Three  Chapters  are  heretical;  of  the  others,  that  the  credit 
of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  must  be  maintained.  How  the  two 
positions  were  reconciled  is  not  clear. 

1.  And  because  certain  writings  under  the  name  of  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsuestia  have  been  handed  to  us  which  contain 
many  things  contrary  to  the  right  faith,  we,  following  the 
warnings  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  who  said:  Prove  all  things,  hold 
fast  that  which  is  good,  therefore  anathematize  Theodore, 
who  was  bishop  of  Mopsuestia,  with  all  his  impious  writings, 
and  also  those  who  defend  him.  We  anathematize  also  the 
impious  epistle  which  is  said  to  have  been  written  by  Ibas 
to  Maris  the  Persian,  as  contrary  to  the  right  faith,  and  also 
all  who  defend  it  and  say  that  it  is  right.  We  anathematize 
also  the  writings  of  Theodoret  which  were  written  contrary 
to  the  right  faith  and  against  the  capitula  of  Cyril. ^ 

2.  Since  it  is  evident  to  us  by  sufficient  reason,  that  who- 
soever attempts  to  do  anything  to  the  disparagement  of  the 
aforesaid  council,  will  rather  sin  against  himself. 

3.  If  it  had  been  shown  conclusively  by  us  to  be  con- 
tained in  the  acts  [i.  e.,  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon],  no  one 
would  have  dared  to  be  the  author  of  so  great  a  presumption 
or  would  have  regarded  as  doubtful  or  undecided  anything 
which  was  brought  before  that  most  holy  judgment;  since 
it  is  to  be  believed  that  those  then  present  could  have 
investigated  things  diligently  even  apart  from  writing,  and 
have  defined  them  positively,  which  appears  to  us  after  so 

1  The  Twelve  Anathematisms  of  Cyril  against  Nestorius. 


THE  AGE  OF  JUSTINIAN  545 

much  time  and  on  account  of  unknown  causes  still  un- 
settled; since  also  it  is  a  part  of  reverence  for  the  synods 
that  in  those  things  which  are  less  understood  one  recognizes 
their  authority. 

4.  All  things  being  accepted  and  remaining  perpetually 
estabHshed  which  were  defined  in  the  venerable  councils  at 
Nicaea,  and  Constantinople,  in  the  first  at  Ephesus,  and  at 
Chalcedon,  and  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  our  predeces- 
sors; and  all  who  in  the  said  holy  councils  were  deposed  are 
without  doubt  condemned,  and  those  are  no  less  absolved 
whose  absolution  was  decreed  by  the  same  synods. 

5.  Subjecting  also  him  to  the  sentence  of  anathema  who 
accepts  as  of  any  force  whatsoever  may  be  found  against  the 
said  synod  of  Chalcedon,  written  in  this  present  letter,  or  in 
anything  in  the  present  case  whatever  done  by  us  or  by  any 
one;  and  let  the  holy  synod  of  Chalcedon,  of  which  the  au- 
thority is  great  and  unshaken,  perpetual  and  reverenced,  have 
the  same  force  as  that  which  the  synods  of  Niccea,  Constanti- 
nople, and  the  first  at  Ephesus  have. 

6.  We  anathematize  also  whoever  does  not  faithfully  fol- 
low and  equally  venerate  the  holy  synods  of  Nicaea,  of  Con- 
stantinople, the  first  of  Ephesus,  and  the  synod  of  Chalce- 
don as  most  holy  synods,  agreeing  in  the  one  and  immaculate 
faith  of  the  Apostles,  and  confirmed  by  the  pontiffs  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See,  and  whoever  wishes  to  correct  as  badly  said,  or  wishes 
to  supply  as  imperfect,  those  things  which  were  done  in  the 
same  councils  which  we  have  mentioned. 

(c)  VigiHus,  Oath  to  Justinian,  August  15,  A.  D.  550. 
Mansi,  IX,  363.     (MSL,  69  :  121.) 

The  Judicatum  met  with  great  opposition  in  the  West.  Vigilius, 
to  still  the  clamor  against  it,  withdrew  it  and  proposed  other  measures 
in  consultation  with  Justinian.  In  connection  with  this  he  bound  him- 
self with  an  oath  to  support  Justinian  in  putting  through  the  con- 
demnation of  the  Three  Chapters,  and  this  oath  Justinian  produced 
later,  when  Vigilius  had  presented  his  Constitutum  to  him  refusing  to 
condemn  the  chapters.  The  Emperor  thereupon  suppressed  the  Con- 
stitutum. 


546    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

The  most  blessed  Pope  Vigilius  has  sworn  to  the  most  pious 
lord  Emperor  in  our  presence,  that  is  of  me,  Theodorus,  bishop 
of  Caesarea,  in  Cappadocia  [see  DCB,  Theodorus  of  Askidas], 
and  of  me,  Cethegus,  the  patrician,  by  the  sacred  nails  with 
which  our  Lord  God  Jesus  Christ  was  crucified  and  by  the 
four  holy  Gospels,  as  also  by  the  sacred  bridle,^  so  also  by  the 
four  Gospels;  that,  being  of  one  mind  and  will  with  your 
piety,  we  shall  so  will,  attempt,  and  act,  as  far  as  we  are 
able,  so  that  the  three  chapters,  that  is,  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia,  the  epistle  attributed  to  Ibas,  and  the  writings  of 
Theodoret  against  the  orthodox  faith  and  his  sayings  against 
the  twelve  capitula  of  the  holy  Cyril,  may  be  condemned  and 
anathematized;  and  to  do  nothing,  either  by  myself  or  by 
those  whom  we  can  trust,  either  of  the  clerical  or  lay  order, 
in  behalf  of  the  chapters,  against  the  will  of  your  piety,  or 
to  speak  or  to  give  counsel  secretly  in  behalf  of  those  chap- 
ters. And  if  any  one  should  say  anything  to  me  to  the  con- 
trary, either  concerning  these  chapters  or  concerning  the 
faith,  or  against  the  State,  I  will  make  him  known  to  your 
piety,  without  peril  of  death,  and  also  what  has  been  said 
to  me,  so  that  on  account  of  my  place  you  do  not  abandon 
my  person;  and  you  have  promised,  because  I  observe  these 
things  toward  your  piety,  to  protect  my  honor  in  all  re- 
spects, and  also  to  guard  my  person  and  reputation  and  to 
defend  them  with  the  help  of  God  and  to  protect  the  privi- 
leges of  my  see.  And  you  have  also  promised  that  this 
paper  shall  be  shown  to  no  one.  I  promise  further  that 
in  the  case  of  the  three  chapters,  we  shall  treat  in  common 
as  to  what  ought  to  be  done,  and  whatsoever  shall  appear  to 
us  useful  we  will  carry  out  with  the  help  of  God.  This  oath 
was  given  the  fifteenth  day  of  August,  indiction  XIII,  the 
twenty-third  year  of  the  reign  of  our  lord  Justinian,  the 
ninth  year  after  the  consulship  of  the  illustrious  Basil.  I, 
Theodore,  by  the  mercy  of  God  bishop  of  Caesarea,  in  Cappa- 

^  Sanctum  frenum.  Query:  Does  this  refer  to  the  tradition  that  Con- 
stantine  made  out  of  the  nails  of  the  cross  a  bit  for  his  horse? 


THE  AGE   OF  JUSTINIAN  547 

docia,  have  subscribed  hereunto  as  a  witness  to  this  oath; 
I,  Flavius  Cethegus,  patrician,  have  subscribed  hereunto  as 
a  witness  to  this  oath. 

(d)  Vigihus,  Constitutum,  May  14,  553.     (MSL,  69  :  67.) 

The  synod  known  as  the  Fifth  General  Council  met  May  5,  553, 
and  proceeded  to  condemn  the  Three  Chapters,  as  directed  by  the 
Emperor.  Vigilius  refused  to  attend,  but  consented  to  pronounce  his 
judgment  on  the  matter  apart  from  the  council.  This  he  did  in  his 
Constitutmn  ad  Imperatorem,  May  14,  553.  In  it  he  condemns  the 
teaching  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  but  opposes  the  condemnation 
of  Theodore  himself,  inasmuch  as  he  had  died  in  the  communion  of 
the  Church,  He  also  opposes  the  condemnation  of  Theodoret  and 
Ibas,  because  both  were  acquitted  at  Chalcedon.  This  Constitutum 
is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  Constitutum  of  554  (MSL,  69  :  143,  147), 
in  which,  after  the  council  had  acceded  to  the  proposals  of  the  Em- 
peror and  condemned  the  Three  Chapters  and  had  excommunicated 
Vigilius  by  removing  his  name  from  the  diptychs,  the  latter  confirmed 
the  decisions  of  the  council  and  joined  in  the  condemnation  of  the  Three 
Chapters.  For  a  discussion  of  the  w^hole  situation,  see  Hefele,  §§  272- 
276.  The  devious  course  followed  by  Vigilius  has  been  the  subject  of 
much  acrimonious  debate.  The  facts  of  the  case  are  now  generally  rec- 
ognized. The  conclusion  of  Cardinal  Hergenrother,  KG.  I,  612,  is  the 
best  that  can  be  said  for  Vigilius:  ''In  the  question  as  to  the  faith, 
Vigilius  was  never  wavering;  but  he  was  so,  indeed,  in  the  question  as 
to  whether  the  action  was  proper  or  opportune,  whether  it  was  advi- 
sable or  necessary  to  condemn  subsequently  men  whom  the  Council  of 
Chalcedon  had  spared,  to  put  forth  a  judgment  which  would  be  re- 
garded by  the  Monophysites  as  a  triumph  of  their  cause,  which  was 
most  obnoxious  for  the  same  reason,  and  its  supposed  dishonoring  of 
the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  and  was  likely  to  create  new  divisions  in- 
stead of  healing  the  old." 

The  portions  of  the  Constitutum  given  below  are  the  conclusions  of 
Vigilius  as  to  each  of  the  Three  Chapters.  The  whole  is  a  lengthy 
document. 

All  these  things  have  been  diKgertly  examined,  and  al- 
though our  Fathers  speak  in  different  phrases  yet  are  guided 
by  one  sentiment,  that  the  persons  of  priests,  who  have  died 
in  the  peace  of  the  Church,  should  be  preserved  untouched; 
likewise  the  constitutions  of  the  Apostolic  See,  which  we  have 
quoted  above,  uniformly  define  that  it  is  lawful  for  no  one 
to  judge  anew  anything  concerning  the  persons  of  the  dead, 


548     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

but  each  is  left  in  that  condition  in  which  the  last  day  finds 
him;  and  especially  concerning  the  name  of  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  what  our  Fathers  determined  is  clearly  shown 
above.  Him,  therefore,  we  dare  not  condemn  by  our  sentence, 
and  we  do  not  permit  him  to  be  condemned  by  any  one  else; 
the  above-written  chapters  of  dogmas,  which  are  damned  by 
us,  or  any  sayings  of  any  one  without  name  affixed,  not 
agreeing  with,  or  consonant  with,  the  evangehcal  and  apos- 
tolic doctrine  and  the  doctrines  of  the  four  synods,  of  Nicaea, 
of  Constantinople,  of  the  first  of  Ephesus,  and  of  Chalcedon, 
we,  however,  do  not  suffer  to  be  admitted  to  our  thought  or 
even  to  our  ears. 

But  concerning  the  writings  which  are  brought  forward 
under  the  name  of  that  venerable  man,  Theodoret,  late 
bishop,  we  wonder,  first,  why  it  should  be  necessary  or  with 
what  desire  anything  should  be  done  to  the  disparagement 
of  the  name  of  that  priest,  who  more  than  a  hundred  years 
ago,  in  the  judgment  of  the  sacred  and  venerable  Council  of 
Chalcedon,  subscribed  without  any  hesitation  and  consented 
with  profound  devotion  to  the  Epistle  of  the  most  blessed  Pope 
Leo.  .  .  .  The  truth  of  these  things  having  been  considered, 
we  determine  and  decree  that  nothing  be  done  or  proposed  by 
any  one  in  judgment  upon  him  to  the  injury  and  defamation 
of  a  man  most  approved  in  the  synod  of  Chalcedon,  that  is 
to  say,  Theodoret  of  Cyrus.  But  guarding  in  all  respects  the 
reverence  of  his  person,  whatsoever  writings  are  brought  for- 
ward under  his  name  or  under  that  of  another  evidently  in 
accord  with  the  errors  of  the  wicked  Nestorius  and  Eutyches 
we  anathematize  and  condemn. 

Then  follow  these  five  anathematisms,  the  text  of  which  may  be 
found  in  Hahn,  §  228: 

I.  If  any  one  does  not  confess  that  the  Word  was  made 
flesh,  the  inconvertibiHty  of  the  divine  nature  having  been 
preserved,  and  from  the  moment  of  conception  in  the  womb 
of  the  Virgin  united  according  to  subsistence  [hypostatically] 


THE  AGE  OF  JUSTINIAN  549 

human  nature  to  Himself,  but  as  with  a  man  already  existing; 
so  that,  accordingly,  the  holy  Virgin  is  not  to  be  believed  to  be 
truly  the  bearer  of  God,  but  is  called  so  only  in  word,  let  him 
be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  deny  that  a  unity  of  natures  according 
to  subsistence  [hypostatically]  was  made  in  Christ,  but  that 
God  the  Word  dwelt  in  a  man  existing  apart  as  one  of  the 
just,  and  does  not  confess  the  unity  of  natures  according  to 
subsistence,  that  God  the  Word  with  the  assumed  flesh  re- 
mained and  remains  one  subsistence  or  person,  let  him  be 
anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  so  divides  the  evangelical,  apostolic  words 
in  reference  to  the  one  Christ,  that  he  introduces  a  division 
of  the  natures  united  in  Him,  let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  says  that  the  one  Jesus  Christ,  God  the 
Word  and  the  same  true  Son  of  Man,  was  ignorant  of  future 
things  or  of  the  day  of  the  last  judgment,  and  was  able  to 
know  only  so  far  as  Deity  revealed  to  Him,  as  if  dwelHng  in 
another,  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  applies  to  Christ  as  if  stripped  of  His  divinity 
the  saying  of  the  Apostle  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,^  that 
He  knew  obedience  by  experience  and  with  strong  crying  and 
tears  offered  prayers  and  supplications  to  God  who  was  able 
to  save  Him  from  death,  and  who  was  perfected  by  the  labors 
of  virtue,  so  that  from  this  he  evidently  introduces  two 
Christs  or  two  Sons,  and  does  not  believe  the  one  and  the  same 
Christ  to  be  confessed  and  adored  Son  of  God  and  Son  of 
Man,  of  two  and  in  two  natures  inseparable  and  undivided, 
let  him  be  anathema. 

.  .  .  We  have  also  examined  concerning  the  Epistle  of  the 
venerable  man  Ibas,  once  bishop  of  the  city  of  Edessa,  concern- 
ing which  you  also  ask  if  in  early  times  anything  concerning 
it  was  undertaken  by  our  Fathers,  or  discussed,  or  examined, 
or  determined.  Because  it  is  known  to  all  and  especially  to 
your  piety,  that  we  are  ignorant  of  the  Greek  language,  yet  by 

1  Heb.  s  :  7,  8. 


550    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

the  aid  of  some  of  our  company,  who  have  knowledge  of  that 
tongue,  we  discover  clearly  and  openly  that  in  the  same  synod 
the  affair  of  the  venerable  man  Ibas  was  examined,  from  the 
action  taken  regarding  Photius,  bishop  of  Tyre,  and  Eus- 
tathius,  bishop  of  Berytus,  that  this  epistle,  concerning  which 
inquiry  is  made,  was  brought  forward  against  him  by  his 
accusers;  and  when,  after  discussion  of  the  affair  was  ended, 
it  was  asked  of  the  venerable  Fathers  what  ought  to  be  done 
concerning  the  matter  of  the  same  Ibas,  the  following  sentence 
was  passed: 

Paschasius  and  Lucentius,  most  reverend  bishops,  and  Bon- 
iface, presbyter,  holding  the  place  of  the  Apostolic  See  (be- 
cause the  apostolic  delegates  are  accustomed  always  to  speak 
and  vote  first  in  synods),  by  Paschasius  said :  "  Since  the  docu- 
ments have  been  read,  we  perceive  from  the  opinion  of  the 
most  reverend  bishops  that  the  most  reverend  Ibas  is  ap- 
proved as  innocent;  for  now  that  his  epistle  has  been  read  we 
recognize  it  as  orthodox.  And  on  this  account  we  decree 
that  the  honor  of  the  episcopate  be  restored  to  him,  and  the 
church,  from  which  unjustly  and  in  his  absence  he  was  driven 
out,  be  given  back."  [The  patriarchs  of  Constantinople 
and  Antioch  agreed,  and  their  opinions  are  also  quoted  by 
Vigilius  from  the  Acts  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.] 

.  .  .  Therefore  we,  following  in  all  things  the  discipline  and 
judgment  of  the  holy  Fathers,  and  the  disposition  of  all 
things  according  to  the  account  which  we  have  given  of  the 
judgment  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  since  it  is  most  evi- 
dently true,  from  the  words  of  the  Epistle  of  the  venerable 
man  Ibas,  regarded  with  the  right  and  pious  mind,  and  from 
the  action  taken  regarding  Photius  and  Eustathius,  and  from 
the  opinions  of  bishop  Ibas,  discussed  in  his  presence  by  those 
present,  that  our  Fathers  present  at  Chalcedon  most  justly 
pronounced  the  faith  of  the  same  venerable  man  Ibas  ortho- 
dox and  his  blaming  the  blessed  Cyril,  which  they  perceive 
to  have  been  from  error  of  human  intelligence,  purged  by 
appropriate  satisfaction,  by  the  authority  of  our  present  sen- 


THE  AGE  OF  JUSTINIAN  551 

tence,  we  determine  and  decree  in  all  things  so  also  in  the 
often-mentioned  Epistle  of  the  venerable  Ibas,  the  judgment 
of  the  Fathers  present  at  Chalcedon  remain  inviolate. 

Conclusion  of  the  Constitutum : 

These  things  having  been  disposed  of  by  us  in  every  point 
with  all  caution  and  dihgence,  in  order  to  preserve  inviolate 
the  reverence  of  the  said  synods  and  the  venerable  constitu- 
tions of  the  same;  mindful  that  it  has  been  written  [cj.  Prov. 
22 :  26],  we  ought  not  to  cross  the  bounds  of  our  Fathers,  we 
determine  and  decree  that  it  is  permitted  to  no  one  of  any 
ecclesiastical  rank  or  dignity  to  do  anything  contrary  to  these 
things  which,  by  this  present  constitution,  we  assert  and  deter- 
mine, concerning  the  oft-mentioned  three  chapters,  or  to 
write  or  to  bring  forward,  or  to  compose,  or  to  teach,  or  to 
make  any  further  investigation  after  this  present  definition. 
But  concerning  the  same  three  chapters,  if  anything  con- 
trary to  these  things,  which  we  here  determine  and  assert, 
is  made  in  the  name  of  any  one,  in  ecclesiastical  order  or 
dignity,  or  shall  be  found  by  any  one  or  anywheresoever, 
such  a  one  by  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See,  in  which  by 
the  grace  of  God  we  are  placed,  we  refute  in  every  way. 

(e)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  553,  Definition. 
Mansi,  IX,  367. 

Condemnation  of  the  Three  Chapters. 

This  action  is  taken  from  the  Definition  of  the  council,  a  rather 
wordy  document,  but  ending  with  a  passage  indicating  the  action  of 
the  council.  From  this  concluding  passage  this  condemnation  is 
taken.     See  Hefele,  §  274,  also  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV,  pp.  306-311. 

We  condemn  and  anathematize  with  all  other  heretics  who 
have  been  condemned  and  anathematized  by  the  before-men- 
tioned four  holy  synods,  and  by  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  Theodore,  who  was  bishop  of  Mopsuestia,  and  his 
impious  writings,  and  also  those  things  which  Theodoret 
impiously  wrote  against  the  right  faith  and  against  the  twelve 
capitula  of  the  holy  Cyril,  and  against  the  first  synod  of  Ephe- 


552    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

sus,  and  also  those  which  he  wrote  in  defence  of  Theodore 
and  Nestorius.  In  addition  to  these,  we  also  anathematize 
the  impious  epistle  which  Ibas  is  said  to  have  written  to  Maris 
the  Persian,  which  denies  that  God  the  Word  was  incarnate  of 
the  holy  Theotokos  and  ever-virgin  Mary,  and  accuses  Cyril, 
of  holy  memory,  who  taught  the  truth,  of  being  a  heretic  and 
of  the  same  sentiments  with  Apollinaris,  and  blames  the  first 
synod  of  Ephesus  for  deposing  Nestorius  without  examination 
and  inquiry,  and  calls  the  twelve  capitula  of  Cyril  impious 
and  contrary  to  the  right  faith,  and  defends  Theodore  and 
Nestorius,  and  their  impious  dogmas  and  writings.  We, 
therefore,  anathematize  the  three  chapters  before  mentioned, 
that  is  the  impious  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  with  his  execra- 
ble writings,  and  those  things  which  Theodoret  impiously 
wrote,  and  the  impious  letter  which  is  said  to  be  by  Ibas, 
together  with  their  defenders  and  those  who  have  written  or 
do  write  in  defence  of  them,  or  who  dare  to  say  that  they  are 
correct,  and  who  have  defended  or  do  attempt  to  defend  their 
impiety  with  the  names  of  the  holy  Fathers  or  of  the  holy 
Council  of  Chalcedon. 

(/)  Council  of  Constantinople  A.  D.  553.  Anathematism 
II.     Mansi,  IX,  201.     CJ.  Denziger,  n.  223. 

Condemnation  of  Origen. 

Appended  to  the  Definition  of  the  council  are  fourteen  anathema- 
tisms,  forming  (i-io)  an  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of  the  two  natures, 
and  concluding  with  condemnation  of  Origen,  together  with  other 
heretics,  and  of  the  Three  Chapters  (11-14).  These  anathematisms 
are  based  upon  a  confession  of  faith  of  the  Emperor  Justinian,  a  lengthy 
document,  but  containing  thirteen  anathematisms.  This  confession 
of  faith  was  composed  before  the  council,  probably  in  551.  For  an 
analysis  of  it,  see  Hefele,  §  263.  The  text  of  the  council's  anathema- 
tisms may  be  found  in  Hefele,  §  274,  also  in  Hahn,  §  148.  Attempts 
have  been  made  by  older  scholars  to  show  that  the  name  Origen  was 
a  later  insertion.     For  arguments,  see  Hefele,  loc.  cit. 

If  any  one  does  not  anathematize  Arius,  Eunomius,  Mace- 
donius,  Apollinaris,  Nestorius,  Eutyches,  and  Origen,  with 
their  impious  writings,  as  also  all  other  heretics  already  con- 


THE  BYZANTINE   STATE   CHURCH  553 

demned  and  anathematized  by  the  holy  CathoHc  and  Apos- 
toHc  Church,  and  by  the  aforesaid  four  holy  synods,  and  all 
those  who  have  been  or  are  of  the  same  mind  with  the  here- 
tics mentioned,  and  who  remain  to  the  end  in  their  impiety, 
let  him  be  anathema. 


§  94.    The  Byzantine  State  Church  under  Justinian 

According  to  Justinian's  scheme  of  Church  government, 
the  Emperor  was  the  head  of  the  Church  in  the  sense  that  he 
had  the  right  and  duty  of  regulating  by  his  laws  the  minutest 
detail  of  worship  and  discipline,  and  also  of  dictating  the  theo- 
logical opinions  to  be  held  in  the  Church.  This  is  shown,  not 
merely  in  his  conduct  of  the  Fifth  General  Council,  but  also  in 
his  attempt,  at  the  end  of  his  life,  to  force  Aphthartodocetism 
upon  the  Church.  This  position  of  the  Emperor  in  relation 
to  the  Church  is  known  as  Caesaropapism.  (See  Bury,  Later 
Roman  Empire,  chap.  XL)  The  ecclesiastical  legislation  of 
Justinian  should  also  be  considered.  At  the  same  time  Jus- 
tinian strictly  repressed  the  lingering  heathenism  and,  in  the 
interest  of  the  schools  at  Constantinople,  closed  the  schools 
at  Athens,  the  last  stronghold  of  paganism. 

{a)  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  39.     (MSG,  86  II  :  2781.) 

Aphthartodocetism  of  Justinian. 

Among  the  many  variations  of  Monophysitism  flourishing  under 
Justinian  was  Aphthartodocetism,  according  to  which  the  body  of  Christ, 
before  as  well  as  after  his  resurrection,  was  "a  glorified  body,"  or  in- 
capable of  suffering.     See  selection  for  description. 

At  that  time  Justinian,  abandoning  the  right  road  of  doc- 
trine and  following  the  path  untrodden  by  the  Apostles  and 
Fathers,  became  entangled  in  thorns  and  briars;  and  he 
attempted  to  fill  the  Church  also  with  these,  but  failed  in  his 
purpose,  and  thereby  fulfilled  the  prediction  of  prophecy.  .  .  . 
Justinian,  after  he  had  anathematized  Origen,  Didymus,  and 
Evagrius,  issued  what  the  Latins  call  an  edict,  after  the  depo- 


554    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

sition  of  Eustochius  [A.  D.  556],  in  which  he  termed  the  body 
of  the  Lord  incorruptible  and  incapable  of  the  natural  and 
blameless  passions;  affirming  that  the  Lord  ate  before  His 
passion  in  the  same  manner  as  after  His  resurrection,  His  holy 
body  having  undergone  no  conversion  or  change  from  the 
time  of  its  actual  formation  in  the  womb,  not  even  in  respect 
to  the  natural  and  voluntary  passions,  nor  yet  after  the  resur- 
rection. To  this  he  proceeded  to  compel  bishops  in  all  parts 
to  give  their  assent.  However,  they  all  professed  to  look  to 
Anastasius,  the  Bishop  of  Antioch,  and  thus  avoided  the  first 
attack. 

(b)  Justinian,  Novella  VI  ''Preface." 
Church  and  State  according  to  Justinian. 

Among  the  greatest  gifts  of  God  bestowed  by  the  kindness 
of  heaven  are  the  priesthood  and  the  imperial  dignity.  Of 
these  the  former  serves  things  divine;  the  latter  rules  human 
affairs  and  cares  for  them.  Both  are  derived  from  the  one 
and  the  same  source,  and  order  human  life.  And,  therefore, 
nothing  is  so  much  a  care  to  the  emperors  as  the  dignity  of 
the  priesthood;  so  that  they  may  always  pray  to  God  for 
them.  For  if  one  is  in  every  respect  blameless  and  filled  with 
confidence  toward  God,  and  the  other  rightly  and  properly 
maintains  in  order  the  commonwealth  intrusted  to  it,  there 
is  a  certain  excellent  harmony  which  furnishes  whatsoever 
is  needful  for  the  human  race.  We,  therefore,  have  the  great- 
est cares  for  the  true  doctrines  of  God  and  the  dignity  of  the 
priesthood  which,  if  they  preserve  it,  we  trust  that  by  it  great 
benefits  will  be  bestowed  by  God,  and  we  shall  possess  undis- 
turbed those  things  which  we  have,  and  in  addition  acquire 
those  things  which  we  have  not  yet  acquired.  But  all  things 
are  well  and  properly  carried  on,  if  only  a  proper  beginning  is 
laid,  and  one  that  is  acceptable  to  God.  But  this  we  believe 
will  be  so  if  the  observance  of  the  sacred  canons  is  cared  for, 
which  also  the  Apostles,  who  are  rightly  to  be  praised,  and  the 
venerated  eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word  of  God, 


THE  BYZANTINE   STATE   CHURCH  555 

delivered,  and  which  the  holy  Fathers  have  also  preserved  and 
explained. 

(c)  Justinian,  Novella  CXXXVII,  6. 

The  following  section  from  the  conclusion  of  a  novella  illustrates  the 
manner  in  which  Justinian  legislated  in  matter  of  internal  affairs  for 
the  Church  and  instituted  a  control  over  the  priesthood  which  was 
other  than  that  of  the  Church's  own  system  of  discipline. 

We  command  that  all  bishops  and  presbyters  shall  ofTer 
the  sacred  oblation  and  the  prayers  in  holy  baptism  not 
silently,  but  with  a  voice  which  may  be  heard  by  the  faithful 
people,  that  thereby  the  minds  of  those  listening  may  be  moved 
to  greater  contrition  and  to  the  glory  of  God.  For  so,  indeed, 
the  holy  Apostle  teaches  (I  Cor.  14  :  16;  Rom.  10  :  10).  .  .  . 
Therefore  it  is  right  that  to  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  our 
God  with  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  be  offered  prayer 
in  the  holy  oblation  and  other  prayers  with  the  voice  by  the 
most  holy  bishops  and  the  presbyters;  for  the  holy  priests 
should  know  that  if  they  neglect  any  of  those  things  they  shall 
render  an  account  at  the  terrible  judgment  of  the  great  God 
and  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  we  shall  not  quietly 
permit  such  things  when  we  know  of  them  and  will  not  leave 
them  unpunished.  We  command,  therefore,  that  the  govern- 
ors of  the  epachies,  if  they  see  anything  neglected  of  those 
things  which  have  been  decreed  by  us,  first  urge  the  metro- 
politans and  other  bishops  to  celebrate  the  aforesaid  synods, 
and  do  whatsoever  things  we  have  ordered  by  this  present  law 
concerning  synods,  and,  if  they  see  them  delaying,  let  them 
report  to  us,  that  from  us  may  come  a  proper  correction  of 
those  who  put  off  holding  synods.  And  the  governors  and 
the  officials  subject  to  them  should  know  that  if  they  do  not 
observe  these  matters  they  will  be  liable  to  the  extreme 
penalty  [i.  e.,  death].  But  we  confirm  by  this  present  law 
all  things  which  have  been  decreed  by  us  in  various  con- 
stitutions concerning  bishops,  presbyters,  and  other  clerics, 
and   further   concerning  lodging-places   for   strangers,  poor- 


556    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

houses,  orphan  asylums  and  others  as  many  as  are  over  the 
sacred  buildings. 

(d)  Justinian,  Novella  CXXIII,  i. 
Laws  governing  the  ordination  of  bishops. 

We  decree  that  whenever  it  is  necessary  to  ordain  a  bishop, 
the  clergy  and  the  leading  citizens  whose  is  the  bishop  who 
is  to  be  ordained  shall  make,  under  peril  of  their  souls,  with  the 
holy  Gospels  placed  before  them,  certificates  concerning  three 
persons,  testifying  in  the  same  certificates  that  they  have  not 
chosen  them  for  any  gifts  or  promises  or  for  reasons  of  friend- 
ship, or  any  other  cause,  but  because  they  know  that  they 
are  of  the  true  and  Catholic  faith  and  of  honest  life,  and  learned 
in  science  and  that  none  of  them  has  either  wife  or  children, 
and  know  that  they  have  neither  concubine  nor  natural  chil- 
dren, but  that  if  any  of  them  had  a  wife  the  same  was  one  and 
first,  neither  a  widow  nor  separated  from  her  husband,  nor 
prohibited  by  the  laws  and  sacred  canons ;  and  know  that  they 
are  not  a  curial  or  an  official,  or,  in  case  they  should  be  such, 
are  not  hable  to  any  curial  or  official  duty;  and  they  know 
that  they  have  in  such  case  spent  not  less  than  fifteen  years 
in  a  monastery.  This  also  is  to  be  contained  in  the  certifi- 
cate: that  they  know  the  person  selected  by  them  to  be  not 
less  than  thirty  years  of  age;  so  that  from  the  three  persons 
for  whom  these  certificates  were  made  the  best  may  be  or- 
dained by  the  choice  and  at  the  peril  of  him  who  ordains.  But 
a  curial  or  an  official  who,  as  has  been  said,  has  Hved  fifteen 
years  in  a  monastery  and  is  advanced  to  the  episcopate  is 
freed  from  his  rank  so  that  as  freed  from  the  curia  he  may 
retain  a  fourth  part  of  his  property,  since  the  rest  of  his  prop- 
erty, according  to  our  law,  is  to  be  claimed  by  the  curia  and 
fisc.  Also  we  give  to  those  who  make  the  certificate  the  priv- 
ilege that  if  they  deem  a  layman,  with  the  exception  of  a 
curial  or  an  official,  worthy  of  the  said  election,  they  may 
choose  such  layman  with  the  two  other  clergy  or  monks,  but 
so,  however,  that  the  layman  who  has  in  this  way  been  chosen 


THE  BYZANTINE   STATE   CHURCH  557 

to  the  episcopate  shall  not  be  ordained  at  once,  but  shall  first 
be  numbered  among  the  clergy  not  less  than  three  months, 
and  so  having  learned  the  holy  canons  and  the  sacred  ministry 
of  the  Church,  he  shall  be  ordained  bishop;  for  he  who  ought 
to  teach  others  ought  not  himself  to  be  taught  by  others  after 
his  consecration.  But  if  by  chance  there  are  not  found  in 
any  place  three  persons  ehgible  to  such  election,  it  is  permitted 
those  who  make  the  certificates  to  make  them  for  two  or  even 
for  only  one  person,  who  shall  each  have  the  testimonials 
mentioned  by  us.  But  if  those  who  ought  to  elect  a  bishop 
do  not  make  this  certificate  within  six  months,  then,  at  the 
peril  of  his  soul,  let  him  who  ought  to  ordain  ordain  a  bishop, 
provided,  however,  that  all  things  which  we  have  said  be 
observed.  But  if  any  one  is  made  bishop  contrary  to  the 
aforesaid  rules,  we  command  that  he  be  driven  entirely  from 
the  episcopate;  but  as  for  him  who  dared  to  ordain  him  against 
these  commands,  let  him  be  separated  from  the  sacred  min- 
istry for  a  year  and  all  his  property,  which  at  any  time  or  in 
any  way  shall  come  into  his  possession,  shall  be  seized  on 
account  of  the  crime  he  has  committed  against  the  rule  of  the 
Church  of  which  he  was  a  bishop. 

Ch.  13.  We  do  not  permit  clergy  to  be  ordained  unless 
they  are  educated,  have  the  right  faith,  and  an  honorable  fife, 
and  neither  have,  nor  have  had,  a  concubine  or  natural  chil- 
dren, but  who  either  five  chastely  or  have  a  lawful  wife  and 
her  one  and  only,  neither  a  widow  not  separated  from  her 
husband,  nor  forbidden  by  laws  and  sacred  canons. 

Ch.  14.  We  do  not  permit  presbyters  to  be  made  less  than 
thirty  years  old,  deacons  and  sub-deacons  less  than  twenty- 
five,  and  lectors  less  than  sixteen;  nor  a  deaconess  to  be  or- 
dained^ in  the  holy  Church  who  is  less  than  forty  years  old 
and  who  has  been  married  a  second  time. 

(e)  Justinian,  Codex,  I,  11. 

Law  against  paganism. 

The  following  laws  of  Justinian,  though  of  uncertain  date,  mark  the 

^  Same  word  used  as  for  ordination  of  clergy. 


558    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

termination  of  the  contest  between  Christianity  and  paganism.  In 
the  second  of  these  laws  there  is  a  reference  to  the  prohibition  of  pagan 
teachers.  It  is  in  line  with  the  closing  of  the  schools  of  the  heathen 
teachers  at  Athens.  The  decree  closing  the  schools  has  not  been  pre- 
served. 

Ch.  9.  We  command  that  our  magistrates  in  this  royal 
city  and  in  the  provinces  take  care  with  the  greatest  zeal  that, 
having  been  informed  by  themselves  or  the  most  religious 
bishops  of  this  matter,  they  make  inquiry  according  to  law 
into  all  impurities  of  pagan  ^  superstitions,  that  they  be  not 
committed,  and  if  committed  that  they  be  punished;  but  if 
their  repression  exceed  provincial  power,  these  things  are  to 
be  referred  to  us,  that  the  responsibility  for,  and  incitement 
of,  these  crimes  may  not  rest  upon  them. 

(i)  It  is  permitted  no  one,  either  in  testament  or  by  gift, 
to  leave  or  give  anything  to  persons  or  places  for  the  main- 
tenance of  pagan  impiety,  even  if  it  is  not  expressly  contained 
in  the  words  of  the  will,  testament,  or  donation,  but  can  be 
truly  perceived  in  some  other  way  by  the  judges.  (2)  But 
those  things  which  are  so  left  or  given  shall  be  taken  from  the 
persons  and  places  to  whom  they  have  been  given  or  left, 
and  shall  belong  to  the  cities  in  which  such  persons  dwell  or 
in  which  such  places  are  situated,  so  that  they  may  be  paid  as 
a  form  of  revenue.  (3)  All  penalties  which  have  been  intro- 
duced by  previous  emperors  against  the  errors  of  pagans  or 
in  favor  of  the  orthodox  faith  are  to  remain  in  force  and  effect 
forever  and  guarded  by  this  present  pious  legislation. 

Ch.  10.  Because  some  are  found  who  are  imbued  with  the 
error  of  the  impious  and  detestable  pagans,  and  do  those  things 
which  move  a  merciful  God  to  just  wrath,  and  that  we  may 
not  suffer  ourselves  to  leave  uncorrected  matters  which  con- 
cern these  things,  but,  knowing  that  they  have  abandoned  the 
worship  of  the  true  and  only  God,  and  have  in  insane  error 
offered  sacrifices,  and,  filled  with  all  impiety,  have  celebrated 
solemnities,   we    subject    those   who  have   committed   these 

^Hellenic,  and  so  throughout. 


THE   BYZANTINE   STATE   CHURCH  559 

things,  after  they  have  been  held  worthy  of  holy  baptism,  to 
the  punishment  appropriate  to  the  crimes  of  which  they  have 
been  convicted;  but  for  the  future  we  decree  to  all  by  this 
present  law  that  they  who  have  been  made  Christians  and  at 
any  time  have  been  deemed  worthy  of  the  holy  and  saving 
baptism,  if  it  appear  that  they  have  remained  still  in  the 
error  of  the  pagans,  shall  suffer  capital  punishment. 

(i)  Those  who  have  not  yet  been  worthy  of  the  venerable 
rite  of  baptism  shall  report  themselves,  if  they  dwell  in  this 
royal  city  or  in  the  provinces,  and  go  to  the  holy  churches 
with  their  wives  and  children  and  all  the  household  subject 
to  them,  and  be  taught  the  true  faith  of  Christians,  so  that 
having  been  taught  their  former  error  henceforth  to  be  re- 
jected, they  may  receive  saving  baptism,  or  know,  if  they 
regard  these  things  of  small  value,  that  they  are  to  have  no 
part  in  all  those  things  which  belong  to  our  commonwealth, 
neither  is  it  permitted  them  to  become  owners  of  anything 
movable  or  immovable,  but,  deprived  of  everything,  they  are 
to  be  left  in  poverty,  and  besides  are  subject  to  appropriate 
penalties. 

(2)  We  forbid  also  that  any  branch  of  learning  be  taught 
by  those  who  labor  under  the  insanity  of  the  impious  pagans, 
so  that  they  may  not  for  this  reason  pretend  that  they  in- 
struct those  who  unfortunately  resort  to  them,  but  in  reaHty 
corrupt  the  minds  of  their  pupils;  and  let  them  not  receive 
any  support  from  the  public  treasury,  since  they  are  not  per- 
mitted by  the  Holy  Scriptures  or  by  pragmatic  forms  [public 
decrees]  to  claim  anything  of  the  sort  for  themselves. 

(3)  For  if  any  one  here  or  in  the  provinces  shall  have  been 
convicted  of  not  having  hastened  to  the  holy  churches  with 
his  wife  and  children,  as  said,  he  shall  suffer  the  aforesaid 
penalties,  and  the  fisc  shall  claim  his  property,  and  they  shall 
be  sent  into  exile. 

(4)  If  any  one  in  our  commonwealth,  hiding  himself,  shall 
be  discovered  to  have  celebrated  sacrifices  or  the  worship  of 
idols,  let  him  suffer  the  same  capital  punishment  as  the  Mani- 


S6o    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

chaeans  and,  what  is  the  same,  the  Borborani  [certain  Ophitic 
Gnostics;  cf.  DCB],  for  we  judge  them  to  be  similar  to  these. 

(5)  Also  we  decree  that  their  children  of  tender  years  shall 
at  once  and  without  delay  receive  saving  baptism;  but  they 
who  have  passed  beyond  their  earHest  age  shall  attend  the 
holy  churches  and  be  instructed  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and 
so  give  themselves  to  sincere  penitence  that,  having  rejected 
their  early  error,  they  may  receive  the  venerable  rite  of  bap- 
tism, for  in  this  way  let  them  steadfastly  receive  the  true  faith 
of  the  orthodox  and  not  again  fall  back  into  their  former  error. 

(6)  But  those  who,  for  the  sake  of  retaining  their  military 
rank  or  their  dignity  or  their  goods,  shall  in  pretence  accept 
saving  baptism,  but  have  left  their  wives  and  children  and 
others  who  are  in  their  households  in  the  error  of  pagans,  we 
command  that  they  be  deprived  of  their  goods  and  have  no 
part  in  our  commonwealth,  since  it  is  manifest  that  they  have 
not  received  holy  baptism  in  good  faith. 

(7)  These  things,  therefore,  we  decree  against  the  abom- 
inable pagans  and  the  Manichaeans,  of  which  Manichaeans 
the  Borborani  are  a  part. 

§  95.    The  Definitive  Type  of  Religion  in  the  East; 

DiONYSIUS  THE  ArEOPAGITE 

The  works  of  Dionysius  the  Areopagite  first  appear  in  the 
controversies  in  the  reign  of  Justinian,  when  they  are  quoted 
in  the  Conference  with  the  Severians,  531  or  533.  There  are 
citations  from  the  works  of  the  Areopagite  fifteen  or  twenty 
years  earlier  in  the  works  of  Severus,  the  Monophysite  pa- 
triarch of  Antioch.  In  this  is  given  the  latest  date  to  which 
they  may  be  assigned.  They  cannot  be  earher  than  476, 
because  the  author  is  acquainted  with  the  works  of  Proclus 
(411-485)  and  uses  them;  also  he  refers  to  the  practice  of 
singing  the  Credo  in  divine  service,  which  was  first  introduced 
by  the  Monophysites  at  Antioch  in  476.  No  closer  determi- 
nation of  the  date  is  possible.   The  author  is  wholly  unknown. 


THE  DEFINITIVE  TYPE  OF  RELIGION      561 

That  he  was  Dionysius  the  Areopagite  (Acts  17  :  34)  is  main- 
tained by  no  scholar  to-day.  His  standpoint  is  that  of  the 
later  Eastern  religious  feeling  and  practice,  with  its  strong 
desire  for  mysteries  and  sacramental  system.  But  he  brings 
to  it  Neo-Platonic  thought  to  such  a  degree  as  to  color  com- 
pletely his  presentation  of  Christian  truth.  The  effect  of 
the  book  was  only  gradual,  but  eventually  very  great.  In  the 
East  it  gave  authority,  which  seemed  to  be  that  of  the  apos- 
tolic age,  for  its  highly  developed  system  of  mysteries,  which 
had  grown  up  in  the  Church.  In  the  West  it  served  as  a 
philosophical  basis  for  scholastic  mysticism.  On  account  of 
the  connection  between  Dionysius  and  the  later  Greek  phi- 
losophy and  the  mediaeval  philosophy,  Dionysius  the  Areopa- 
gite occupies  a  place  in  the  histories  of  philosophy  quite  out 
of  proportion  to  the  intrinsic  merit  of  the  writer. 

Additional  source  material:  English  translations  of  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite,  Dean  Colet,  ed.  by  J.  H.  Lupton,  London,  1869,  and 
J.  Parker,  Oxford,  1897  (not  complete);  a  new  translation  into  Ger- 
man appeared  in  the  new  edition  of  the  Kempten  Bihliothek  der  Kirchen- 
vater,  191 2. 

(a)  Dionysius  Areopagita,  De  Ccdesti  Hierarchia,  III,  2. 
(MSG,  3  :  165.) 
Dionysius  thus  defines  "Hierarchy": 

He  who  speaks  of  a  hierarchy  indicates  thereby  a  holy 
order  .  .  .  which  in  a  holy  manner  works  the  mysteries  of 
illumination  which  is  appropriate  to  each  one.  The  order 
of  the  hierarchy  consists  in  this,  that  some  are  purified  and 
others  purify;  some  are  illuminated  and  others  illuminate; 
some  are  completed  and  others  complete. 

(fi)  De  Ccelesti  Hierarchia,  VI,  2.     (MSG,  3  :  200.) 
The  heavenly  hierarchy. 

Theology  has  given  to  all  heavenly  existences  new  explan- 
atory titles.  Our  divine  initiator  divides  these  into  three 
threefold  ranks.     The  first  is  that,  as  he  says,  which  is  ever 


562    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

about  God,  and  which,  as  it  is  related  (Ezek.  i),  is  perma- 
nently and  before  all  others  immediately  united  to  Him;  for 
the  explanation  of  the  Holy  Scripture  tells  us  that  the  most 
holy  throne  and  the  many-eyed  and  many- winged  ranks, 
which  in  Hebrew  are  called  cherubim  and  seraphim,  stand 
before  God  in  the  closest  proximity.  This  threefold  order,  or 
rank,  our  great  leader  names  the  one,  Hke,  and  only  truly 
first  hierarchy,  which  is  more  godlike  and  stands  more  im- 
mediately near  the  first  effects  of  the  illuminations  of  di- 
vinity than  all  others.  As  the  second  hierarchy,  he  names 
that  which  is  composed  of  authorities,  dominions,  and  pow- 
ers, and  as  the  third  and  last  of  the  heavenly  hierarchies  he 
names  the  order  of  angels,  archangels,  and  principaHties. 

(c)  De  Ecclesiastica  Hierarchia,  I,  i.     (MSG,  3  :  372.) 
The  nature  of  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy. 

That  our  hierarchy  .  .  .  which  is  given  by  God,  is  God- 
inspired  and  divine,  a  divinely  acting  knowledge,  activity,  and 
completion,  we  must  show  from  the  supernal  and  most  Holy 
Scriptures  to  those  who  through  hierarchical  secrets  and  tra- 
ditions have  been  initiated  into  the  holy  consecration.  .  .  . 
Jesus,  the  most  divine  and  most  transcendent  spirit,  the  prin- 
ciple and  the  being  and  the  most  divine  power  of  every  hier- 
archy, holiness,  and  divine  operation,  brings  to  the  blessed  be- 
ings superior  to  us  a  more  bright  and  at  the  same  time  more 
spiritual  light  and  makes  them  as  far  as  possible  like  to  His 
own  light.  And  through  our  love  which  tends  upward  toward 
Him,  by  the  love  of  the  beautiful  which  draws  us  up  to  Him, 
He  brings  together  into  one  our  many  heterogeneities;  that 
He  might  perfect  them  so  as  to  become  a  uniform  and  di- 
vine life,  condition,  and  activity.  He  gives  us  the  power  of  the 
divine  priesthood.  In  consequence  of  this  honor  we  arrive 
at  the  holy  activity  of  the  priesthood,  and  so  we  ourselves 
come  near  to  the  beings  over  us,  that  we,  so  far  as  we  are 
able,  approximate  to  their  abiding  and  unchangeable  holy 
state  and  so  look  up  to  the  blessed  and  divine  brilliancy  of- 


THE  DEFINITIVE  TYPE  OF  RELIGION      563 

Jesus,  gaze  religiously  on  what  is  attainable  by  us  to  see,  and  are 
illuminated  by  the  knowledge  of  what  is  seen;  and  thus  we  are 
initiated  into  the  mystic  science,  and,  initiating,  we  can  become 
light-like  and  divinely  working,  complete  and  completing. 

(d)  De  Ecclesiastica  Hierarchia,  V,  3.     (MSG,  3  :  504.) 

The  most  holy  consecration  of  initiation  has  as  the  godlike 
power  or  activity  the  expiatory  purification  of  the  imperfect, 
as  the  second  the  illuminating  consecration  of  the  purified, 
and  as  the  last,  which  also  includes  the  other  two,  the  perfect- 
ing of  the  consecrated  in  the  knowledge  of  the  consecrations 
that  belong  to  them.  .  .  . 

5.  The  divine  order  of  the  hierarchy  is  the  first  under  the 
God-beholding  orders;  it  is  the  highest  and  also  the  last, 
for  in  it  every  other  order  of  our  hierarchy  ends  and  is  com- 
pleted.2  For  we  see  that  every  hierarchy  ends  in  Jesus,  and 
so  each  one  ends  in  the  God-filled  hierarchs. 

6.  The  hierarchical  order,  which  is  filled  full  of  the  per- 
fecting power,  performs  especially  the  consecrations  of  the 
hierarchy,  imparts  by  revelation  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred 
things,  and  teaches  the  conditions  and  powers  appropriate 
to  them.  The  order  of  priests  which  leads  to  light  leads  to 
the  divine  beholding  of  the  sacred  mysteries  all  those  who 
have  been  initiated  by  the  divine  order  of  the  hierarchs  and 
with  that  order  performs  its  proper  sacred  functions.  In 
what  it  does  it  displays  the  divine  working  through  the  most 
holy  symbols  [i.  e.,  sacraments]  and  makes  those  who  approach 
beholders  and  participants  in  the  most  holy  mysteries,  send- 
ing on  to  the  hierarch  those  who  desire  the  knowledge  of  those 
sacred  rites  which  are  seen.  The  order  of  the  liturges  [or 
deacons]    is  that  which  cleanses  and  separates  the  unlike 

^  By  hierarch  is  to  be  understood  in  this  connection  the  episcopal  order,  or 
the  bishop. 

2C/.  Epistula,  VIII,  2.  (MSG,  3  :  1092.)  "Every  order  of  the  ecclesiastical 
hierarchy  has  relation  to  God  and  is  more  godlike  than  that  which  is  further 
removed  from  God,  and  lighter  and  more  illuminating  in  all  that  is  nearer  to 
the  true  light.  Do  not  understand  this  nearness  in  a  local  sense;  it  has  refer- 
ence rather  to  the  ability  to  receive  God." 


564    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

before  they  come  to  the  sacred  rites  of  the  priests,  purifies 
those  who  approach  that  it  may  render  them  pure  from  all 
that  is  opposing  and  unworthy  of  beholding  and  participat- 
ing in  the  sacred  mysteries. 

(e)  De  Ecclesiastica  Hierarchia,  1,  3.     (MSG,  3  :  373.) 

The  sacraments. 

The  mysteries  or  sacraments,  according  to  Dionysius  the  Areopagite, 
are  six  in  number:  baptism,  the  eucharist,  anointing  or  confirmation, 
the  consecration  of  priests,  the  consecration  of  monks, ^  and  the  con- 
secration of  the  dead.  These  he  discusses  in  chs.  2-7  of  the  Eccle- 
siastical Hierarchy. 

Salvation  can  in  no  other  way  come  about  than  that  the 
saved  are  deified.  The  deification  is  the  highest  possible 
resemblance  to  God  and  union  with  Him.  The  common 
aim  of  all  the  hierarchy  is  the  love  which  hangs  upon  God  and 
things  divine,  which  fills  with  a  divine  spirit  and  works  in 
godlike  fashion;  and  before  this  is  the  complete  and  never 
retreating  flight  from  that  which  is  opposed  to  it,  the  knowl- 
edge of  being  as  being,  the  vision  and  knowledge  of  the  holy 
truth,  the  divinely  inspired  participation  in  the  homogeneous 
perfection  of  the  One  himself,  so  far  as  man  can  come  to  that, 
the  enjoyment  of  the  holy  contemplation,  which  spiritually 
nourishes  and  deifies  every  one  who  strives  for  it. 

CHAPTER  II.  THE  TRANSITION  TO  THE  MIDDLE  AGES. 
THE  FOUNDATION  OF  THE  GERMANIC  NATIONAL 
CHURCHES 

While  the  doctrinal  system  of  the  Church  was  being  wrought 
out  in  the  disputes  and  councils  of  Rome  and  the  East,  the 
foundations  of  the  Germanic  national  churches  were  being 
laid  in  the  West.  In  the  British  Isles  the  faith  was  extended 
from  Britain  to  Ireland  and  thence  to  Scotland  (§  96).  Among 
the  inmates  of  the  monasteries  of  these  countries  were  many 
monks  who  were  moved  to  undertake  missionary  journeys 
to  various  parts  of  Western  Europe,  and  among  them  St. 

^  The  highest  order  of  all  the  consecrated  orders  is  the  holy  order  of  monks. 


THE  DEFINITIVE  TYPE   OF  RELIGION      565 

Columbanus.  But  even  more  important  for  the  future  of 
Western  Christendom  was  the  conversion  of  the  Franks  from 
paganism  to  Catholic  Christianity.  At  a  time  when  the 
other  Germanic  rulers  were  still  Arian,  Clovis  and  the  Franks 
became  CathoHcs  and,  as  a  consequence,  the  champions  of 
the  Catholic  faith.  The  Franks  rapidly  became  the  dominant 
power  in  the  West,  and  soon  other  Germanic  races  either  were 
conquered  or  followed  the  example  of  the  Franks  and  became 
CathoHcs  (§  97).  The  State  churches  that  thus  arose  were 
more  under  the  control  of  the  local  royal  authority  than  the 
Catholic  Church  had  previously  been,  and  the  rulers  were 
little  disposed  to  favor  outside  control  of  the  ecclesiastical 
affairs  of  their  kingdoms  (§  98).  Toward  the  end  of  the  sixth 
century  the  greatest  pontiff  of  the  ancient  Church,  Gregory 
the  Great,  more  than  recovered  the  prestige  and  influence 
which  had  been  lost  under  Vigihus.  By  his  able  administra- 
tion he  did  much  to  unite  the  West,  to  heal  the  schism  re- 
sulting from  the  Fifth  Council,  and  to  overcome  the  heresies 
which  divided  the  Arians  and  the  CathoHcs.  At  the  same 
time  he  advanced  the  authority  of  the  see  of  Rome  in  the 
East  as  weH  as  in  the  West  (§  99).  Of  the  many  statesman- 
like undertakings  of  Gregory  none  had  more  far-reaching 
consequences  than  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  and 
the  estabHshment  in  England  of  a  church  which  would  be  in 
close  and  loyal  dependence  upon  the  Roman  see,  and  in  con- 
sequence of  that  close  connection  would  be  the  heir  of  the 
best  traditions  of  culture  in  the  West  (§  100). 

§  96.     The  Celtic  Church  of  the  British  Isles. 

§  97.  The  Conversion  of  the  Franks:  the  EstabHshment  of 
Catholicism  in  the  Germanic  Kingdoms. 

§  98.     The  State  Church  of  the  Germanic  Kingdoms. 

§  99.  Gregory  the  Great  and  the  Roman  Church  in  the 
Second  Half  of  the  Sixth  Century  and  the  Begin- 
ning of  the  Seventh  Century. 

§  100.     The  Foundation  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church. 


566    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 


§  96.    The  Celtic  Church  in  the  British  Isles 

Christianity  was  probably  planted  in  the  British  Isles 
during  the  second  century;  as  to  its  growth  in  the  ante- 
Nicene  period  Httle  is  definitely  known.  Representatives 
of  the  British  Church  were  at  Aries  in  314.  The  Church  was 
in  close  connection  with  the  Church  on  the  Continent  during 
the  fourth  century  and  in  the  fifth  during  the  Pelagian  con- 
troversy. The  Christianity  thus  established  was  completely 
overthrown  or  driven  into  Wales  by  the  invasion  of  the  pagan 
Angles,  Jutes,  and  Saxons  circa  449-500.  (For  the  conver- 
sion of  the  newcomers,  v.  infra,  §  100.)  Early  in  the  fifth 
century  the  conversion  of  Ireland  took  place  by  missionaries 
from  Britain.  In  this  conversion  St.  Patrick  traditionally 
plays  an  important  part. 

Additional  source  material:  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  Eng.  trans,  by  Giles, 
London,  1894;  by  A.  M.  Sellar,  London,  1907  (for  Latin  text,  v.  infra, 
a);  Adamnani,  Vita  S.  Columbce,  ed,  J.  T.  Fowler,  1894  (with  val- 
uable introduction  and  translation);  St.  Patrick,  Genuine  Writings, 
ed.  G.  T.  Stokes  and  C.  H.  H.  Wright,  Dublin,  1887;  J.  D.  Newport 
White,  The  Writings  of  St.  Patrick,  1904.  For  bibliography  of  sources, 
see  Gross,  The  Sources  and  Literature  of  English  History,  1900,  pp. 
221/. 

(a)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec.  Gentis  Anglorum,  I,  13.     (MSL,  95  :  40.) 

The  Venerable  Bede  (672  or  673-735),  monk  at  Jarrow,  the  most 
learned  theologian  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  was  also  the  first  his- 
torian of  England.  For  the  earliest  period  he  used  what  written 
sources  were  available.  His  work  becomes  of  independent  value  with 
the  account  of  the  coming  of  Augustine  of  Canterbury,  597  (I,  23). 
The  history  extends  to  A.  D.  731.  The  best  critical  edition  is  that  of 
C.  Plummer,  1896,  which  has  a  valuable  introduction,  copious  his- 
torical and  critical  notes,  and  careful  discrimination  of  the  sources. 
Wm.  Bright's  Chapters  on  Early  English  Church  History  is  an  elaborate 
commentary  on  Bede's  work  as  far  as  709,  the  death  of  Wilfrid.  Trans- 
lation of  Bede's  History  by  J.  A.  Giles,  may  be  found  in  Bohn's  Anti- 
quarian Library,  and  better  by  A.  M.  Sellar,  1907. 

In  the  following  passage  we  have  the  only  reference  made  by  Bede 
to  the  conversion  of  Ireland,  and  his  failure  to  mention  Patrick  has 
given  rise  to  much  controversy,  see  J.  B.  Bury,  The  Life  of  St.  Patrick 


CELTIC  CHURCH  IN  THE  BRITISH  ISLES    567 

and  his  Place  in  History^  1905.  This  passage,  referring  to  Palladius, 
is  a  quotation  from  the  Chronica  of  Prosper  of  Aquitaine  (403-463) 
ann.  431  (MSL,  51,  critical  edition  in  MGH,  Auct.  antiquiss,  9:1); 
from  Gildas,  De  excidio  Britannia  liber  querulus  (MSL,  69  1327,  critical 
edition  in  MGH,  Auct.  antiquiss,  13.  A  translation  by  J.  A.  Giles  in 
Six  Old  English  Chronicles ,  in  Bohn's  Antiquarian  Library) y  is  the  refer- 
ence to  the  letter  written  to  the  Romans;  from  the  Chronica  of  Marcel- 
linus  Comes  (MSL,  51  :  913;  critical  edition  in  MGH,  Auct.  antiquiss, 
11)  is  the  reference  to  Blaeda  and  Attila. 

In  the  year  of  the  Lord's  incarnation,  423,  Theodosius  the 
younger  received  the  empire  after  Honorius  and,  being  the 
forty-fifth  from  Augustus,  retained  it  twenty-six  years.  In 
the  eighth  year  of  his  reign,  Palladius  was  sent  by  Celestinus, 
the  pontiff  of  the  Roman  Church,  to  the  Scots  ^  that  beheved 
in  Christ  to  be  their  first  bishop.  In  the  twenty-third  year 
of  his  reign  (446),  Aetius,  the  illustrious,  who  was  also  patri- 
cian, discharged  his  third  consulate  with  Symmachus  as  his 
colleague.  To  him  the  wretched  remnants  of  the  Britons  sent 
a  letter  beginning:  ^'To  Aetius,  thrice  consul,  the  groans  of 
the  Britons."  And  in  the  course  of  the  letter  they  thus  ex- 
press their  calamities:  ^'The  barbarians  drive  us  to  the  sea; 
the  sea  drives  us  back  to  the  barbarians;  between  them  there 
have  arisen  two  sorts  of  death;  we  are  either  slain  or 
drowned."  Yet  neither  could  all  this  procure  any  assistance 
from  him,  as  he  was  then  engaged  in  a  most  dangerous  war 
with  Blasda  and  Attila,  kings  of  the  Huns.  And  though  the 
year  next  before  this,  Blasda  had  been  murdered  by  the 
treachery  of  his  brother  Attila,  yet  Attila  himself  remained  so 
intolerable  an  enemy  to  the  republic  that  he  ravaged  almost 
all  Europe,  invading  and  destroying  cities  and  castles. 

(b)  Patrick,  Confessio,  chs.  i,  10.     (MSL,  53  :  801.) 

The  call  of  St.  Patrick  to  be  a  missionary. 

There  is  much  dispute  and  uncertainty  about  the  life  and  work  of 
St.  Patrick.  Of  the  works  of  Patrick,  two  appear  to  be  genuine,  his 
Confessio  and  his  Epistola  ad  Coroticum.  The  other  works  attributed 
to  him  are  very  probably  spurious.     The  genuine  works  may  be  found 

^  The  Irish  were  known  as  Scots.  The  name  Scotland  was  given  to  that 
country  on  account  of  invaders  from  North  Ireland. 


568     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

in  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  Councils  and  Ecclesiastical  Documents  relat- 
ing to  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  vol.  II,  pt.  ii,  296  Jf. 

I,  Patrick,  a  sinner,  the  most  ignorant  and  least  of  all  the 
faithful,  and  the  most  contemptible  among  many,  had  for  my 
father  Calpornius  the  deacon,  son  of  the  presbyter  Potitus, 
the  son  of  Odissus,  who  was  of  the  village  of  Bannavis  Taber- 
nia;  he  had  near  by  a  Kttle  estate  where  I  was  taken  captive. 
I  was  then  nearly  sixteen  years  old.  But  I  was  ignorant  of 
the  true  God^  and  I  was  taken  into  captivity  unto  Ireland, 
with  so  many  thousand  men,  according  to  our  deserts,  be- 
cause we  had  forsaken  God  and  not  kept  His  commandments 
and  had  not  been  obedient  to  our  priests  who  warned  us 
of  our  salvation.  And  the  Lord  brought  upon  us  the  fury 
of  His  wrath  and  scattered  us  among  many  nations,  even 
to  the  end  of  the  earth,  where  now  my  meanness  appears  to 
be  among  strangers.  And  there  the  Lord  opened  the  senses 
of  my  unbeUef,  that  I  might  remember  my  sin,  and  that 
I  might  be  converted  with  my  whole  heart  to  my  Lord 
God,  who  looked  upon  my  humbleness  and  had  mercy  upon 
my  youth  and  ignorance,  and  guarded  me  before  I  knew  Him, 
and  before  I  knew  and  distinguished  between  good  and  evil, 
and  protected  me  and  comforted  me  as  a  father  a  son. 

.  .  .  And  again  after  a  few  years-  I  was  with  my  relatives 
in  Britain,  who  received  me  as  a  son,  and  earnestly  besought 
me  that  I  should  never  leave  them  after  having  endured  so 
many  great  tribulations.  And  there  I  saw  in  a  vision  by 
night  a  man  coming  to  me  as  from  Ireland,  and  his  name  was 
Victorinus,  and  he  had  innumerable  epistles;  and  he  gave  me 
one  of  them  and  I  read  the  beginning  of  the  epistle  as  follows : 
''The  voice  of  the  Irish."  And  while  I  was  reading  the  epistle, 
I  think  that  it  was  at  the  very  moment,  I  heard  the  voice  of 
those  who  were  near  the  wood  of  Fochlad,^  which  is  near  the 

1/.  e.,  not  necessarily  a  pagan,  but  he  did  not  love  God,  or  was  not  yet 
"  converted." 

2  In  the  meanwhile  he  had  escaped  to  France  and  lived  there. 

3  Where  Patrick  had  lived  as  a  slave. 


CELTIC  CHURCH  IN  THE  BRITISH  ISLES     569 

Western  Sea.  And  thus  they  cried  out  with  one  voice:  We 
beseech  thee,  holy  youth,  to  come  here  and  dwell  among  us. 
And  I  was  greatly  smitten  in  heart,  and  could  read  no  fur- 
ther and  so  I  awoke.  Thanks  be  to  God,  because  after 
many  years  the  Lord  granted  them  according  to  their  cry. 

(c)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  4.     (MSL,  95  :  121.) 
St.  Ninian  and  St.  Columba  in  Scotland. 

In  the  year  of  our  Lord  565,  when  JusXin  the  younger,  the 
successor  of  Justinian,  took  the  government  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  there  came  into  Britain  a  priest  and  abbot,  dis- 
tinguished in  habit  and  monastic  Ufe,  Columba  by  name,  to 
preach  the  word  of  God  to  the  provinces  of  the  northern  Picts, 
that  is,  to  those  who  are  separated  from  the  southern  parts 
by  steep  and  rugged  mountains.  For  the  southern  Picts, 
who  had  their  homes  within  those  mountains,  had  long  before, 
as  is  reported,  forsaken  the  error  of  idolatry,  and  embraced 
the  true  faith,  by  the  preaching  of  the  word  to  them  by  Ninian,^ 
a  most  reverend  bishop  and  holy  man  of  the  British  nation, 
who  had  been  regularly  instructed  at  Rome  in  the  faith 
and  mysteries  of  the  truth,  whose  episcopal  see  was  named 
after  St.  Martin,  the  bishop,  and  was  famous  for  its  church, 
wherein  he  and  many  other  saints  rest  in  the  body,  and 
which  the  Enghsh  nation  still  possesses.  The  place  belongs 
to  the  province  of  Bernicia,  and  is  commonly  called  Candida 
Casa,^  because  he  there  built  a  church  of  stone,  which  was 
not  usual  among  the  Britons. 

Columba  came  to  Britain  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign  of 
Bridius,  the  son  of  Meilochon,  the  very  powerful  king  of  the 
Picts,  and  he  converted  by  work  and  example  that  nation  to 
the  faith  of  Christ;  whereupon  he  also  received  the  aforesaid 
island  [lona]  for  a  monastery.  It  is  not  large,  but  contains 
about  five  families,  according  to  EngHsh  reckoning.     His  suc- 

*  This  reference  to  Ninian  is  the  most  important  there  is;  in  fact,  Bede  is 
here  the  chief  authority  for  the  work  of  this  missionary. 
^WhithernCj  Galloway. 


570    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

cessors  hold  it  to  this  day,  and  there  also  he  was  buried, 
when  he  was  seventy-seven,  about  thirty-two  years  after  he 
came  into  Britain  to  preach.  Before  he  came  into  Britain 
he  had  built  a  noble  monastery  in  Ireland,  which  from  the 
great  number  of  oaks  is  called  in  the  Scottish  tongue^  Dear- 
mach,  that  is,  the  Field  of  Oaks.  From  both  of  these  monas- 
teries many  others  had  their  origin  through  his  disciples  both 
in  Britain  and  Ireland;  but  the  island  monastery  where  his 
body  lies  holds  the  rule. 

That  island  always  has  for  its  ruler  an  abbot,  who  is  a 
priest,  to  whose  direction  all  the  province  and  even  bishops 
themselves  are  subject  by  an  unusual  form  of  organization, 
according  to  the  example  of  their  first  teacher,  who  was  not 
a  bishop,  but  a  priest  and  monk;  of  whose  life  and  discourses 
some  writings  are  said  to  have  been  preserved  by  his  disciples. 
But  whatever  he  was  himself,  this  we  regard  as  certain  con- 
cerning him,  that  he  left  successors  renowned  for  their  great 
continency,  their  love  of  God,  and  their  monastic  rules.  How- 
ever, they  followed  uncertain  cycles^  in  their  observance  of  the 
great  festival  [Easter],  for  no  one  brought  them  the  synodal 
decrees  for  the  observance  of  Easter,  because  they  were 
placed  so  far  away  from  the  rest  of  the  world ;  they  only  prac- 
tised such  works  of  piety  and  chastity  as  they  could  learn 
from  the  prophetical,  evangeHcal,  and  apostolical  writings. 
This  manner  of  keeping  Easter  continued  among  them  for  a 
long  time,  that  is,  for  the  space  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  years, 
or  until  the  year  of  our  Lord's  incarnation  715. 

§  97.    The  Conversion  of  the  Franks.    The  Establish- 
ment OF  Catholicism  in  the  Germanic  Kingdoms 

Chlodowech  (Clovis,  481-5 11)  was  originally  a  king  of  the 
SaHan  Franks,  near  Tournay.  By  his  energy  he  became  king 
of  all  the  Franks,  and,  overthrowing  Syagrius  in  486,  pushed 
his  frontier  to  the  Loire.     In  496  he  conquered  a  portion  of  the 

^7.  e.,  Irish  tongue.  ^  Rules  for  computing  Easter. 


THE   CONVERSION  OF  THE  FRANKS        571 

Alemanni.  About  this  time  he  became  a  Catholic.  He  had 
for  some  time  favored  the  Cathohc  reHgion,  and  with  his 
conversion  his  rule  was  associated  with  that  cause  in  the  king- 
doms subject  to  Arian  rulers.  In  this  way  his  support  of 
Catholicism  was  in  line  with  his  poKcy  of  conquest.  By  con- 
stant warfare  Chlodowech  was  able  to  push  his  frontier,  in 
507,  to  the  Garonne.  His  death,  in  511,  at  less  than  fifty 
years  of  age,  cut  short  only  for  a  time  the  extension  of  the 
Frankish  kingdom.  Under  his  sons,  Burgundy,  Thuringia, 
and  Bavaria  were  conquered.  The  kingdom,  which  had  been 
divided  on  the  death  of  Chlodowech,  was  united  under  the 
youngest  son,  Chlotar  I  (sole  ruler  558-561),  again  divided 
on  his  death,  to  be  united  under  Chlotar  II  (sole  ruler  613- 
628).  In  Spain  the  Suevi,  in  the  northwest,  became  Cathohc 
under  Carrarich  in  550.  They  were  conquered  in  585  by  the 
Visigoths,  who  in  turn  became  Cathohc  in  589. 

(a)  Gregory   of   Tours,   Eistoria  Francorum,   II,   30,   31. 

(MSL,  71  :  225.) 

Gregory  of  Tours  (538-593)  became  bishop  of  Tours  in  573.  Placed 
in  this  way  in  the  most  important  see  of  France,  he  was  constantly 
thrown  in  contact  with  the  Merovingian  royal  family  and  had  abun- 
dant opportunity  to  become  acquainted  with  the  course  of  events  at 
first  hand.  His  most  important  work,  the  History  of  the  Franks,  is 
especially  valuable  from  the  fifth  book  on,  as  here  he  is  on  ground  with 
which  he  was  personally  familiar.  In  Book  II,  from  which  the  selection 
is  taken,  Gregory  depends  upon  others,  and  must  be  used  with  caution. 

The  baptism  of  Chlodowech  was  probably  the  result  of  a  long  proc- 
ess of  deliberation,  beginning  probably  before  his  marriage  with 
Chrotechildis,  a  Burgundian  princess,  who  was  a  Catholic.  While 
still  a  pagan  he  was  favorably  disposed  toward  the  Catholic  Church. 
About  496  he  was  baptized,  probably  on  Christmas  Day,  at  Rheims,  by 
St.  Remigius.  The  place  and  date  have  been  much  disputed  of  late. 
The  earhest  references  to  the  conversion  are  by  Nicetus  of  Trier  {oh. 
circa  566),  Epistula  ad  Chlodosvindam  reginam  Longohardoriim  (MSL, 
65  :375);  and  Avitus,  Epistula  41,  addressed  to  Chlodowech  himself. 
(MSL,  59  :  257).  A  careful  examination  of  all  the  evidence  may  be 
found  in  A.  Hauck,  Kirchengeschichte  Deutschlands ,  fourth  ed.,  I,  S9Sf- 
Hauck  concludes  that  ''the  date,  December  25,  496,  may  be  regarded 
as  almost  certainly  the  date  of  the  baptism  of  Chlodowech.  The 
connection  as  to  time  between  the  first  war  with  the  Alemanni  and  the 


572     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

baptism  may  have  given  occasion  to  seek  for  some  actual  connection  be- 
tween the  two  events."  The  selection  is  therefore  given  as  the  tra- 
ditional version  and  is  not  to  be  rehed  upon  as  correct  in  detail.  It 
represents  what  was  probably  the  current  belief  within  a  few  decades 
of  the  event. 

Ch.  30.  The  queen  (Chrotechildis)  ceased  not  to  warn  Chlo- 
dowech  that  he  should  acknowledge  the  true  God  and  forsake 
idols.  But  in  no  way  could  he  be  brought  to  beheve  these 
things.  Finally  war  broke  out  with  the  Alemanni.  Then  by 
necessity  was  he  compelled  to  acknowledge  what  before  he  had 
denied  with  his  will.  The  two  armies  met  and  there  was  a 
fearful  slaughter,  and  the  army  of  Chlodowech  was  on  the 
point  of  being  annihilated.  When  the  king  perceived  that, 
he  raised  his  eyes  to  heaven,  his  heart  was  smitten  and  he 
was  moved  to  tears,  and  he  said:  ''Jesus  Christ,  whom  Chrote- 
childis declares  to  be  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  who  says  that 
Thou  wilt  help  those  in  need  and  give  victory  to  those  who 
hope  in  Thee,  humbly  I  flee  to  Thee  for  Thy  mighty  aid,  that 
Thou  wilt  give  me  victory  over  these  my  enemies,  and  I  will 
in  this  way  experience  Thy  power,  which  the  people  called 
by  Thy  name  claim  that  they  have  proved  to  be  in  Thee. 
Then  will  I  believe  on  Thee  and  be  baptized  in  Thy  name. 
For  I  have  called  upon  my  gods  but,  as  I  have  seen,  they  are 
far  from  my  help.  Therefore,  I  believe  that  they  have  no 
power  who  do  not  hasten  to  aid  those  obedient  to  them.  I 
now  call  upon  Thee  and  I  desire  to  believe  on  Thee.  Only 
save  me  from  the  hand  of  my  adversaries."  As  he  thus 
spoke,  the  Alemanni  turned  their  backs  and  began  to  take 
flight.  But  when  they  saw  that  their  king  was  dead,  they 
submitted  to  Chlodowech  and  said:  ''Let  not,  we  pray  thee, 
a  nation  perish;  now  we  are  thine."  Thereupon  he  put  an 
end  to  the  war,  exhorted  the  people,  and  returned  home  in 
peace.  He  told  the  queen  how  by  calling  upon  the  name  of 
Christ  he  had  obtained  victory.  This  happened  in  the  fif- 
teenth year  of  his  reign  (496). 

Ch.  31.  Thereupon  the  queen  commanded  that  the  holy  Re- 


THE   CONVERSION  OF  THE  FRANKS        573 

migius,  bishop  of  Rheims,  be  brought  secretly  to  teach  the  king 
the  word  of  salvation.  The  priest  was  brought  to  him  secretly 
and  began  to  lay  before  him  that  he  should  beheve  in  the  true 
God,  the  creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  forsake  idols,  who 
could  neither  help  him  nor  others.  But  he  replied:  ''Gladly 
do  I  listen  to  thee,  most  holy  Father,  but  one  thing  remains, 
for  the  people  who  follow  me  suffer  me  not  to  forsake  their 
gods.  But  I  will  go  and  speak  to  them  according  to  thy 
words."  When  he  met  his  men,  and  before  he  began  to  speak, 
all  the  people  cried  out  together,  for  the  divine  power  had 
anticipated  him:  "We  reject  the  mortal  gods,  pious  king,  and 
we  are  ready  to  follow  the  immortal  God  whom  Remigius 
preaches."  These  things  were  reported  to  the  bishop,  who 
rejoiced  greatly  and  commanded  the  font  to  be  prepared. 
.  .  .  The  king  first  asked  to  be  baptized  by  the  pontiff.  He 
went,  a  new  Constantine,  into  the  font  to  be  washed  clean 
from  the  old  leprosy,  and  to  purify  himself  in  fresh  water 
from  the  stains  which  he  had  long  had.  But  as  he  stepped 
into  the  baptismal  water,  the  saint  of  God  began  in  moving 
tone:  "Bend  softly  thy  head,  Sicamber,  reverence  what  thou 
hast  burnt,  and  burn  what  thou  hast  reverenced."  .  .  . 

Therefore  the  king  confessed  Almighty  God  in  Trinity,  and 
was  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  was  anointed  with  the  holy  chrism  with 
the  sign  of  the  cross.  Of  his  army  more  than  three  thousand 
were  baptized.  Also  his  sister  Albofledis  was  baptized.  .  .  . 
And  another  sister  of  the  king,  Lanthechildis  by  name,  who  had 
fallen  into  the  heresy  of  the  Arians,  was  converted,  and  when 
she  had  confessed  that  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  were  of 
the  same  substance  with  the  Father,  she  was  given  the  chrism. 

(6)  Gregory  of  Tours,  Hist.  Francorum,  II,  35-38.  (MSL, 
71  :  232.) 

Clovis  at  the  head  of  the  anti-Arian  party  in  Gaul. 

Ch.  35.  When  Alarich,  the  king  of  the  Goths,  saw  that 
King  Chlodow^ch  continually  conquered  the  nations,  he  sent 


574    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

messengers  to  him  saying:  ''If  my  brother  wishes,  it  is  also 
in  my  heart  that  we  see  each  other,  if  God  will."  Chlodo- 
wech  was  not  opposed  to  this  and  came  to  him.  They  met 
on  an  island  in  the  Loire,  in  the  neighborhood  of  Amboise, 
in  the  territory  of  Tours,  and  spake  and  ate  and  drank  to- 
gether, promised  mutual  friendship,  and  parted  in  peace. 

Ch.  36.  But  already  many  Gauls  wished  with  all  their 
heart  to  have  the  Franks  for  their  masters.  It  therefore  hap- 
pened that  Quintianus,  bishop  of  Rhodez,  was  driven  out  of 
his  city  on  account  of  this.  For  they  said  to  him:  "You  wish 
that  the  rule  of  the  Franks  possessed  this  land."  And  a  few 
days  after,  when  a  dispute  had  arisen  between  him  and  the 
citizens,  the  rumor  reached  the  Goths  who  dwelt  in  the  city, 
for  the  citizens  asserted  that  he  wished  to  be  subject  to  the 
rule  of  the  Franks;  and  they  took  counsel  and  planned  how 
they  might  kill  him  with  the  sword.  When  this  was  reported 
to  the  man  of  God,  he  rose  by  night,  and  with  the  most  faith- 
ful of  his  servants  left  Rhodez  and  came  to  Arverne.  .  .  . 

Ch.  37.  Thereupon  Kjng  Chlodowech  said  to  his  men: 
''It  is  a  great  grief  to  me  that  these  Arians  possess  a  part  of 
Gaul.  Let  us  go  forth  with  God's  aid,  conquer  them,  and 
bring  this  land  into  our  power."  And  since  this  speech 
pleased  all,  he  marched  with  his  army  toward  Poitiers,  for 
there  dwelt  Alarich  at  that  time.  .  .  .  King  Chlodowech  met 
the  king  of  the  Goths,  Alarich,  in  the  Campus  Vocladen- 
sis  [Vouille  or  Voulon-sur-Clain]  ten  miles  from  Poitiers;  and 
while  the  latter  fought  from  afar,  the  former  withstood  in  hand 
to  hand  combat.  But  since  the  Goths,  in  their  fashion,  took 
to  flight.  King  Chlodowech  at  length  with  God's  aid  won 
the  victory.  He  had  on  his  side  a  son  of  Sigbert  the  Lame, 
whose  name  was  Chloderich.  The  same  Sigbert,  ever  since 
he  fought  with  the  Alemanni  near  Zulpich  [in  496],  had 
been  wounded  in  the  knee  and  limped.  The  king  killed  King 
Alarich  and  put  the  Goths  to  flight.  .  .  .  From  this  battle 
Amalrich,  Alarich's  son,  fled  to  Spain,  and  by  his  abihty 
obtained  his  father's  kingdom.     Chlodowech,  however,  sent 


THE   CONVERSION  OF  THE  FRANKS        575 

his  son  Theuderic  to  Albi,  Rhodez,  and  Arverne,  and  depart- 
ing he  subjugated  those  cities,  from  the  borders  of  the 
Goths  to  the  borders  of  the  Burgundians,  to  the  rule  of  his 
father.     But  Alarich  reigned  twenty- two  years. 

Chlodowech  spent  the  winter  in  Bourdeaux,  and  carried 
away  the  entire  treasure  of  Alarich  from  Toulouse,  and  he 
went  to  Angouleme.  Such  favor  did  the  Lord  show  him  that, 
when  he  looked  on  the  walls,  they  fell  of  themselves.  There- 
upon when  the  Goths  had  been  driven  from  the  city  he 
brought  it  under  his  rule.  After  the  accompHshment  of  these 
victories  he  returned  to  Tours  and  dedicated  many  gifts  to 
the  holy  Church  of  St.  Martin. 

Ch.  38.  At  that  time  he  received  from  the  Emperor  Anas- 
tasius  the  title  of  consul,  and  in  the  Church  of  St.  Martin  he 
assumed  the  purple  cloak  and  put  on  his  head  a  diadem.  He 
then  mounted  a  horse  and  with  his  own  hand  scattered  among 
the  people  who  were  present  gold  and  silver  in  the  greatest 
profusion,  all  the  way  from  the  door  of  the  porch  of  the  Church 
of  St.  Martin  to  the  city  gate.  And  from  this  day  forward  he 
was  addressed  as  consul,  or  Augustus.  From  Tours  Chlodo- 
wech went  to  Paris  and  made  that  the  seat  of  his  authority.^ 

(c)  Third  Council  of  Toledo,  A.  D.  589,  Acts.  Mansi, 
IX,  992. 

This  council  is  the  most  important  event  in  the  history  of  the  Visi- 
gothic  Church  of  Spain,  marking  the  abandonment  of  Arianism  by 
the  ruling  race  of  Spain  and  the  formal  acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  or  the  Catholic  faith  and  unity.  The  Suevi  had  accepted 
Catholicism  more  than  thirty-five  years  before;  see  Synod  of  Braga, 
A.  D.  563,  in  Hefele,  §  285  (cf.  also  Hahn,  §  176,  who  gives  the  text  of 
the  anathematisms  in  which,  after  a  statement  of  the  Catholic  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  the  balance  of  the  anathematisms  are  concerned  with 
PriscilHanism).  Reccared,  the  Visigothic  king  (586-601),  became  a 
CathoHc  in  587,  and  held  the  council  of  589  to  effect  the  conversion  of 
the  nation  to  his  new  faith.  For  a  letter  of  Gregory  the  Great  on  the 
conversion  of  Reccared,  see  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XII,  pt.  2,  p.  87,  and 
two  from  Gregory  to  Reccared  himself  {ibid.,  vol.  XIII,  pp.  16,  35). 
The  creed,  as  professed  at  Toledo,  is  the  first  instance  of  the  authorized 
use  of  the  term  "and  the  Son"  in  a  creed  in  connection  with  the  doc- 
^  It  had  been  at  Soissons  after  486,  and  before  that  at  Tournay. 


576    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

trine  of  the  "procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  the  form  in  which  the  so- 
called  Nicene  creed  came  to  be  used  in  the  West,  and  the  source  of 
much  dispute  between  the  East  and  the  West  in  the  ninth  century  and 
ever  since. 

I.     From  the  Speech  of  Reccared  at  the  Opening  of  the  Council. 

I  judge  that  you  are  not  ignorant,  most  reverend  priests 
[i.  e.,  bishops]  that  I  have  called  you  into  our  presence  for  the 
restoration  of  ecclesiastical  discipline;  and  because  in  time 
past  the  existence  of  heresy  prevented  throughout  the  entire 
Catholic  Church  the  transaction  of  synodical  business.  God, 
who  has  been  pleased  by  our  action  to  remove  the  obstacle 
of  the  same  heresy,  warns  us  to  set  in  order  the  ecclesiastical 
laws  concerning  church  matters.  Therefore  let  it  be  a  matter 
of  joy  and  gladness  to  you  that  the  canonical  order  is  being 
brought  back  to  the  lines  of  the  times  of  our  fathers,  in  the 
sight  of  God  and  to  our  glory. 

n.     From  the  Statement  of  Faith. 

There  is  present  here  all  the  famous  nation  of  the  Goths, 
esteemed  for  their  real  bravery  by  nearly  all  nations,  who, 
however,  by  the  error  of  their  teachers  have  been  separated 
from  the  faith  and  unity  of  the  Catholic  Church;  but  now, 
agreeing  as  a  whole  with  me  in  my  assent  to  the  faith,  partici- 
pate in  the  communion  of  that  Church  which  receives  in  its 
maternal  bosom  a  multitude  of  different  nations  and  nour- 
ishes them  with  the  breasts  of  charity.  Concerning  her  the 
prophet  foretelling  said:  ''My  house  shall  be  called  the  house 
of  prayer  for  all  nations."  For  not  only  does  the  conversion 
of  the  Goths  add  to  the  amount  of  our  reward,  but  also  an 
infinite  multitude  of  the  people  of  the  Suevi,  whom  under  the 
protection  of  Heaven  we  have  subjected  to  our  kingdom,  led 
away  into  heresy  by  the  fault  of  an  alien,^  we  have  endeavored 
to  recall  to  the  source  of  truth.  Therefore,  most  holy 
Fathers,   I   offer   as   by   your    hands    to   the    eternal   God, 

^In  465,  under  the  influence  of  the  Visigoths,  the  Suevi,  formerly  Catholic, 
had  embraced  Arianism. 


THE   CONVERSION  OF  THE  FRANKS        577 

as  a  holy  and  pleasing  offering,  these  most  noble  nations, 
who  have  been  attached  by  us  to  the  Lord's  possessions. 
For  it  will  be  to  me  in  the  day  of  the  retribution  of  the 
just  an  unfading  crown  and  joy  if  these  peoples,  who  now  by 
our  planning  have  returned  to  the  unity  of  the  Church,  re- 
main founded  and  estabhshed  in  the  same.  For  as  by  the 
divine  determination  it  has  been  a  matter  of  our  care  to  bring 
these  peoples  to  the  unity  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  so  it  is  a 
matter  of  your  teaching  to  instruct  them  in  the  CathoKc 
dogmas,  by  which  they  may  be  instructed  in  the  full  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  that  they  may  know  how  to  reject  totally 
the  errors  of  pernicious  heresy,  to  remain  in  charity  in  the 
ways  of  the  true  faith,  and  to  embrace  with  fervent  desire  the 
communion  of  the  CathoHc  Church.  ...  As  it  is  of  benefit 
to  us  to  profess  with  the  mouth  what  we  beheve  in  the  heart 
.  .  .  therefore  I  anathematize  Arius  with  all  his  doctrines  .  .  . 
so  I  hold  in  honor,  to  the  praise  and  honor  and  glory  of  God, 
the  faith  of  the  holy  Council  of  Nicaea.  ...  I  embrace  and 
hold  the  faith  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  Fathers  assembled 
at  Constantinople.  ...  I  beheve  the  faith  of  the  first  Coun- 
cil of  Ephesus  .  .  .  likewise  with  all  the  CathoHc  Church  I 
reverently  receive  the  faith  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon.  .  .  . 
To  this  my  confession  I  have  added  the  holy  constitutions 
[i.  e.,  confessions  of  faith]  of  the  above-mentioned  councils, 
and  I  have  subscribed  with  complete  singleness  of  heart  to 
the  divine  testimony. 

Here  follows  the  faith  of  Nicsea,  the  so-called  creed  of  Constanti- 
nople, with  the  words  relating  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  ex  Patre  et  Filio 
procedentem  (proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son) ;  the  actual  form 
filioque  does  not  here  occur. 

III.     From  the  Anathemas^  Hahn,  §  178. 

3.  Whosoever  does  not  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost  and  will 
not  beheve  that  He  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and 
will  not  say  that  He  is  co-essential  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  let  him  be  anathema. 


578     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

IV.     From  the  Cano7ts,  Bruns,  I,  212. 

Canon  i.  After  the  damnation  of  the  heresy  of  Arius  and 
the  exposition  of  the  CathoHc  faith,  this  holy  council  ordered 
that,  because  in  the  midst  of  many  heretics  and  heathen 
throughout  the  churches  of  Spain,  the  canonical  order  has 
been  necessarily  neglected  (for  while  liberty  of  transgressing 
abounded,  and  the  desirable  discipline  was  denied,  and  every 
one  fostered  excesses  of  heresy  in  the  protection  and  contin- 
uation of  evil  times,  a  strict  discipline  was  far  off,  but  now 
the  peace  of  the  Church  has  been  restored  by  the  mercy 
of  Christ),  everything  which  by  the  authority  of  early  canons 
may  be  forbidden  is  forbidden,  discipline  arising  again,  and 
everything  is  required  which  they  order  done.  Let  the  con- 
stitutions of  all  the  councils  remain  in  their  force,  likewise 
all  the  synodical  letters  of  the  holy  Roman  prelates.  Hence- 
forth let  no  one  aspire  unworthily  to  ecclesiastical  promotions 
and  honors  against  the  canons.  Let  nothing  be  done  which  the 
holy  Fathers,  filled  with  the  Spirit  of  God,  decreed  should  not 
be  done.  And  let  those  who  presume  to  violate  the  laws  be 
restrained  by  the  severity  of  the  earher  canons. 

Canon  2.  Out  of  reverence  for  the  most  holy  faith  and  to 
strengthen  the  weak  minds  of  men,  acting  upon  the  advice  of 
the  most  pious  and  glorious  King  Reccared^  the  synod  has 
ordered  that  throughout  the  churches  of  Spain,  Gaul,  and 
Gallicia,  the  symbol  of  the  faith  be  recited  according  to  the 
form  of  the  Oriental  churches,  the  symbol  of  the  Council  of 
Constantinople,  that  is,  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  bishops; 

^  "Let  all  the  churches  of  Spain  and  Gallicia  observe  this  rule,  that  at  every 
time  of  offering  of  the  sacrifice  and  before  the  communion  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  Oriental  parts,  all  should  repeat 
together  with  a  clear  voice  the  most  sacred  symbol  of  the  faith,  that  first  the 
people  may  speak  the  faith  which  they  hold,  and  they  may  bring  hearts  purified 
by  faith  to  the  reception  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  For  so  long  as  this 
constitution  be  perpetually  observed  in  the  Church  of  God,  the  entire  belief 
of  the  faithful  will  be  confirmed,  and  the  false  faith  of  the  infidels  be  confuted,  in 
order  that  one  may  be  very  easily  inclined  to  believe  what  one  hears  very  often 
repeated,  neither  shall  any  one  excuse  himself  from  all  blame  by  pleading  igno- 
rance of  the  faith,  when  he  knows  from  the  mouth  of  all  what  the  Catholic 
Church  holds  and  believes."  (From  the  Speech  of  Reccared,  cf.  Mansi,  loc.  cit.) 


GERMANIC   STATE   CHURCH  579 

and  before  the  Lord's  prayer  is  said,  let  it  be  pronounced  to 
the  people  in  a  clear  voice,  by  which  also  the  true  faith  may 
have  a  manifest  testimony,  and  the  hearts  of  the  people  may 
approach  to  the  reception  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
with  hearts  purified  by  faith. 


§  98.    The  State   Church  in  the   Germanic  Kingdoms 

So  long  as  the  Germanic  rulers  remained  Arian,  the  Catholic 
Church  in  their  kingdoms  was  left  for  the  most  part  alone  or 
hindered  in  its  synodical  activity.  But  as  the  kingdoms  be- 
came Catholic  on  the  conversion  of  their  kings,  the  rulers 
were  necessarily  brought  into  close  ofhcial  relations  with  the 
Church  and  its  administration;  and  they  exercised  a  strict 
control  over  the  ecclesiastical  councils  and  the  episcopal  elec- 
tions. The  Merovingians,  on  their  conversion  from  paganism, 
at  once  became  CathoHcs,  and  they  consequently  assumed  this 
control  immediately.  With  the  extension  of  the  Frankish 
kingdom,  the  authority  of  the  king  in  ecclesiastical  affairs 
was  likewise  extended.  In  Spain  the  Visigoths  were  Arians 
until  589.  On  the  conversion  of  the  nation  at  that  date,  the 
king  at  once  assumed  an  extensive  ecclesiastical  authority 
(for  Reccared's  confirmation  of  the  Third  Synod  of  Toledo, 
589,  see  Bruns,  I,  393),  and  in  the  development  of  the  system 
the  councils  of  Toledo  became  at  once  the  parliaments  of  the 
entire  nation,  now  united  through  its  common  faith  and  the 
synods  of  the  Church.  This  system  was  cut  short  by  the 
Moslem  invasion  of  711,  and  the  development  of  the  Church 
and  its  relation  to  the  State  is  to  be  studied  in  the  Frankish 
kingdom  in  which  from  this  time  the  ecclesiastical  develop- 
ment of  Western  Europe  is  to  be  traced.  The  best  evidence 
for  the  legal  state  of  the  Church  under  the  Germanic  rulers  is 
chiefly  in  the  acts  of  councils. 

But  there  was  also  in  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  Germanic 
kingdoms  a  strong  monastic  spirit  which  was  by  no  means 
wilHng  to  see  the  Church  become  an  ''establishment."     This 


58o    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

fitted  in  poorly  with  the  condition  of  the  State  Church.     It 
is  illustrated  by  the  career  of  St,  Columbanus. 

(a)  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  511,  Synodical  Letter.  Bruns, 
II,  160. 

The  king  summons  the  council  and  approves  its  findings.  Extract 
from  the  synodical  letter  in  which  the  canons  are  sent  to  Chlodowech. 

To  their  Lord,  the  Son  of  the  Catholic  Church,  Chlodowech, 
the  most  glorious  king,  all  the  priests^  whom  you  have  com- 
manded to  come  to  the  council. 

Because  your  great  care  for  the  glorious  faith  so  moves  you 
to  reverence  for  the  Catholic  rehgion  that  from  love  of  the 
priesthood  you  have  commanded  the  bishops  to  be  gathered 
together  into  one  that  they  might  treat  of  necessary  things, 
according  to  the  proposals  of  your  will  and  the  titles  [i.  e., 
topics]  which  you  have  given,  we  reply  by  determining  those 
things  which  seem  good  to  us;  so  that  if  those  things  which 
we  have  decreed  prove  to  be  right  in  your  judgment,  the  ap- 
proval of  so  great  a  king  and  lord  might  by  a  greater  authority 
cause  the  determinations  of  so  many  bishops  to  be  observed 
more  strictly. 

{h)  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  549,  Canons.    Bruns,  II,  211. 

Canons  regarding  Episcopal  elections.  The  first  instance  in  ca- 
nonical legislation  in  the  West  recognizing  the  necessity  of  royal  con- 
sent to  the  election  of  a  bishop.  For  the  relation  of  the  Pope  to  metro- 
poHtans,  see  in  §  99  the  Epistle  of  Gregory  the  Great  to  Vigilius  of 
Aries. 

Canon  10.  That  it  shall  be  lawful  for  no  one  to  obtain 
the  episcopate  by  payment  or  bargaining,  but  with  the  per- 
mission of  the  king,  according  to  the  choice  of  the  clergy  and 
the  people,  as  it  is  written  in  the  ancient  canons,  let  him  be 
consecrated  by  the  metropoKtan  or  by  him  whom  he  sends  in 
his  place,  together  with  the  bishops  of  the  province.     That  if 

^  Here,  as  very  often,  the  bishops  attending  a  council  are  spoken  of  as 
priests.  The  term  "  priest  "  had  not  become  identified  with  "  presbyter." 
The  bishop  was  a  sacerdos  or  priest.     The  presbyter  was  also  a  sacerdos. 


GERMANIC  STATE   CHURCH  581 

any  one  violates  by  purchase  the  rule  of  this  holy  constitution, 
we  decree  that  he,  who  shall  have  been  ordained  for  money, 
shall  be  deposed. 

Canon  11.  Likewise  as  the  ancient  canons  decree,  no  one 
shall  be  made  bishop  of  those  who  are  unwilling  to  receive 
him,  and  neither  by  the  force  of  powerful  persons  are  the  citi- 
zens and  clergy  to  be  induced  to  give  a  testimonial  of  election.^ 
For  this  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  crime;  that  if  this  should  be 
done,  let  him,  who  rather  by  violence  than  by  legitimate 
decree  has  been  ordained  bishop,  be  deposed  forever  from 
the  honor  of  the  episcopate  which  he  has  obtained. 

(c)  Council  of  Paris,  A.  D.  557,  Canon.     Bruns,  H,  221. 

Canon  8.  No  bishop  shall  be  ordained  for  people  against 
their  will,  but  only  he  whom  the  people  and  clergy  in  full 
election  shall  have  freely  chosen;  neither  by  the  command 
of  the  prince  nor  by  any  condition  whatever  against  the  will 
of  the  metropoHtan  and  the  bishops  of  the  province  shall  he 
be  forced  in.  That  if  any  one  with  so  great  rashness  pre- 
sumes by  royal  appointment^  to  reach  the  height  of  this  honor, 
let  him  not  deserve  to  be  received  as  a  bishop  by  the  bishops 
of  the  province  in  which  the  place  is  located,  for  they  know 
that  he  was  ordained  improperly.  If  any  of  the  fellow  bishops 
of  the  province  presume  to  receive  him  against  this  prohibi- 
tion, let  him  be  separated  from  all  his  brethren  and  be  deprived 
of  the  charity  of  all. 

(d)  Gregory  of  Tours,  Hist.  Francorum,  IV,  15.  (MSL, 
71  :  280.) 

The  difficulty  of  the  Church  in  hving  under  the  Merovingian  mon- 
archs  with  their  despotism  and  violence  is  illustrated  by  the  follow- 
ing passage.     The  date  of  the  event  is  556. 

1  This  testimonial,  or  certificate  of  election,  was  to  be  presented  to  the  king 
that  he  might  give  his  assent;  cf.  §  94. 

-  The  kings  appear  to  have  attempted  to  appoint  bishops  without  canonical 
election.  This  was  never  recognized  by  the  Church  as  lawful  on  the  part  of 
the  king  and  was  always  opposed.     See  next  selection  from  Gregory  of  Tours. 


582    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

When  the  clergy  of  Tours  heard  that  King  Chlothar  [511- 
561;  558-561,  as  surviving  son  of  Chlodowech,  sole  ruler  of 
the  Franks]  had  returned  from  the  slaughter  of  the  Saxons, 
they  prepared  the  consensus^  that  they  had  chosen  the  priest 
Eufronius  bishop  and  went  to  the  king.  When  they  had 
presented  the  matter,  the  king  answered:  ''I  had  indeed  com- 
manded that  the  priest  Cato  should  be  ordained  there,  and 
why  has  our  command  been  disregarded?"  They  answered 
him:  ''We  have  indeed  asked  him,  but  he  would  not  come." 
And  as  they  said  this  suddenly  the  priest  Cato  appeared  and 
besought  the  king  to  command  that  Cautinus  be  removed 
and  himself  be  appointed  bishop  of  Arverne.^  But  when  the 
king  laughed  at  this,  he  besought  him  again,  that  he  might  be 
ordained  for  Tours,  which  he  had  before  rejected.  Then  the 
king  said  to  him:  "I  have  already  commanded  that  you  should 
be  consecrated  bishop  of  Tours,  but,  as  I  hear,  you  have  de- 
spised that  church;  therefore  you  shall  be  withheld  from  the 
government  of  it."  Thereupon  he  departed  ashamed.  But 
when  the  king  asked  concerning  the  holy  Eufronius,  they  said 
that  he  was  a  nephew  of  the  holy  Gregory,  whom  we  have 
mentioned  above.^  The  king  answered:  ''That  is  a  distin- 
guished and  very  great  family.  Let  the  will  of  God  and  of  the 
holy  Martin^  be  done;  let  the  election  be  confirmed."  And 
after  he  had  given  a  decree  for  the  ordination,  the  holy  Eufro- 
nius was  ordained  as  the  eighth  bishop  after  St.  Martin.^ 

(e)  Gregory  of  Tours,  Hist.  Franc,  VIII,  22.  (MSL, 
71  1464.) 

Royal  interference  in  episcopal  elections  was  not  infrequent  under 
the  Merovingians.  Confused  as  the  following  account  is,  it  is  clear 
from  it  that  the  kings  were  accustomed  to  violate  the  canons  and  to 
exercise  a  free  hand  in  episcopal  appointments.  See  also  the  preced- 
ing selection.  The  date  of  the  event  is  585.  For  the  Synod  of  Magon, 
A.  D.  585,  see  Hefele,  §  286. 

^  Testimonial  of  election.  -  /.  e.,  Clermont-Ferrand. 

3  See  Greg.  Tour.,  III.  19.    Cf.  DCB,  art.  "  Gregorius  (29)."     He  was  bishop 
of  Langres. 
^  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  the  patron  saint  of  the  church  of  Tours. 
^  Eufronius  was  the  predecessor  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  the  author  of  this  passage. 


GERMANIC   STATE   CHURCH  583 

Laban,  Bishop  of  Eauze/  died  that  year.  Desiderius,  a 
layman,  succeeded  him,  although  the  king  had  promised 
with  an  oath  that  he  would  never  again  ordain  a  bishop  from 
the  laity.  But  to  what  will  not  the  accursed  hunger  for  gold 
drive  human  hearts?  Bertchramnus^  had  returned  from 
the  synod, ^  and  on  the  way  was  seized  with  a  fever.  The 
deacon  Waldo  was  summoned,  who  in  baptism  had  also  been 
called  Bertchramnus,  and  he  committed  to  him  the  whole 
of  his  episcopal  office,  as  he  also  committed  to  him  the  pro- 
visions regarding  his  testament,  as  well  as  those  who  merited 
well  by  him.  As  he  departed  the  bishop  breathed  out  his 
spirit.  The  deacon  returned  and  with  presents  and  the  con- 
sensus^ of  the  people,  went  to  the  king^  but  he  obtained  noth- 
ing. Then  the  king,  having  issued  a  mandate,  commanded 
Gundegisilus,  count  of  Saintes,  surnamed  Dodo,  to  be  con- 
secrated bishop;  and  so  it  was  done.  And  because  many  of 
the  clergy  of  Saintes  before  the  synod  had,  in  agreement  with 
Bishop  Bertchramnus,  written  various  things  against  their 
Bishop  Palladius  to  humiliate  him,  after  his^  death  they  were 
arrested  by  the  bishop,  severely  tortured,  and  stripped  of 
their  property. 

(/)  Chlotar  H,  Capitulary,  A.  D.  614.  MGH,  Leges,  11. 
Capitularia  Regum  Francorum,  ed.  Bore  tins,  I,  20,  MGH, 
Leges,  1883. 

Not  only  did  the  councils  admit  the  right  of  the  king  to  approve  the 
candidate  for  consecration  as  bishop,  but  the  kings  laid  down  the  prin- 
ciple that  their  approval  was  necessary.  They  also  legislated  on  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  e.  g.,  on  the  election  of  bishops.  The  text  may 
also  be  found  in  Altmann  und  Bernheim,  Ausgewdhlte  Urkunden,  Ber- 
lin, 1904,  p.  I. 

Ch.  I.  It  is  our  decree  that  the  statutes  of  the  canons  be 
observed  in  all  things,  and  those  of  them  which  have  been 

^  At  one  time  metropolis  of  Novempopulania;  when  it  was  destroyed  in  the 
ninth  century,  the  dignity  passed  to  Auch,  where  it  remained. 

2  Bishop  of  Bourdeaux.  ^  At  Magon. 

^  The  formal  certificate  of  election.  ^  Guntrum. 

®  Bishop  Bertchramnus's. 


584    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

neglected  in  the  past  because  of  the  circumstances  of  the 
times  shall  hereafter  be  observed  perpetually;  so  that  when  a 
bishop  dies  one  shall  be  chosen  for  his  place  by  the  clergy 
and  people,  who  is  to  be  ordained  by  the  metropolitan  and  his 
provincials;  if  the  person  be  worthy  let  him  be  ordained  by 
the  order  of  the  prince;  but  if  he  be  chosen  from  the  palace^ 
let  him  be  ordained  on  account  of  the  merit  of  his  person  and 
his  learning. 

Ch.  2.  That  no  bishop  while  Hving  shall  choose  a  succes- 
sor, but  another  shall  be  substituted  for  him  when  he  be- 
come so  indisposed  that  he  cannot  rule  his  church  and  clergy. 
Likewise,  that  while  a  bishop  is  living  no  one  shall  presume 
to  take  his  place,  and  if  one  should  seek  it,  it  is  on  no  account 
to  be  given  him. 

(g)  Fredegarius  Scholasticus,  Chronicon,  ysf.  (MSL, 
71  ^653.) 

The  Chronicon  of  Fredegarius  is  important,  as  it  continues  in  its 
last  book  the  History  of  the  Franks  by  Gregory  of  Tours.  The  best 
edition  is  in  the  MGH,  Scriptores  rerum  Merovingicarum  II,  ed.  Krusch. 
An  account  of  the  work  may  be  found  in  DCB,  art.  "  Fredegarius 
Scholasticus."  In  the  Frankish  kingdom  the  higher  clergy,  especially 
the  bishops,  assembled  with  the  great  men  of  the  realm  in  councils 
under  the  king  to  discuss  affairs  of  State.  These  councils  have  been 
called  concilia  mixta.  They  are,  however,  to  be  distinguished  from 
the  strictly  ecclesiastical  assemblies  in  which  the  clergy  alone  acted. 
A  change  was  introduced  by  Charles  the  Great.  The  following  pas- 
sage shows  the  king  consulting  with  the  bishops,  along  with  the  other 
nobles. 

§  75.  In  the  eleventh  year  of  his  reign  Dagobert  came  to 
the  city  of  Metz,  because  the  Wends  at  the  command  of  Samo 
still  manifested  their  savage  fury  and  often  made  inroads 
from  their  territory  to  lay  waste  the  Frankish  kingdom, 
Thuringia,  and  other  provinces.  Dagobert,  coming  to  Metz, 
with  the  counsel  of  the  bishops  and  nobles,  and  the  consent  of 
all  the  great  men  of  his  kingdom,  made  his  son,  Sigibert,  king 
of  Austrasia,  and  assigned  him  Metz  as  his  seat.     To  Chun- 

^  /.  e.,  if  he  be  one  of  the  court  chaplains. 


GERMANIC  STATE   CHURCH  585 

ibert,  bishop  of  Cologne,  and  the  Duke  Adalgisel,  he  com- 
mitted the  conduct  of  his  palace  and  kingdom. ^  Also  he 
gave  to  his  son  sufficient  treasure  and  fitted  him  out  with  all 
that  was  appropriate  to  his  high  dignity;  and  whatsoever  he 
had  given  him  he  confirmed  by  charters  specially  made  out. 
Since  then  the  Prankish  land  was  sufficiently  defended  by  the 
zeal  of  the  Austrasians  against  the  Wends. 

§  76.  When  in  the  twelfth  year  of  his  reign  a  son  named 
Chlodoveus  was  born  by  Queen  Nantechilde  to  Dagobert, 
he  made,  with  the  counsel  and  advice  of  the  Neustrians,  an 
agreement  with  his  Sigibert.  All  the  great  men  and  the  bish- 
ops of  Austrasia  and  the  other  people  of  Sigibert,  holding  up 
their  hands,  confirmed  it  with  an  oath,  that  after  the  death  of 
Dagobert,  Neustria  and  Burgundy,  by  an  established  ordi- 
nance, should  fall  to  Chlodoveus;  but  Austrasia,  because  in 
population  and  extent  it  was  equal  to  those  lands,  should 
belong  in  its  entire  extent  to  Sigibert. 

(Ji)  Jonas,  Vita  Columbani,  chs.  9,  12,  17,  32,  33,  59,  60. 
(MSL,  87  :  1016.) 

Columbanus  (543-615)  was  the  most  active  and  successful  of  the 
Irish  missionary  monks  laboring  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  In  585 
Columbanus  left  Ireland  to  preach  in  the  wilder  parts  of  Gaul,  and  in 
590  or  591  founded  Luxeuil,  which  became  the  parent  monastery  of  a 
considerable  group  of  monastic  houses.  He  came  into  conflict  with 
the  Frankish  clergy  on  account  of  the  Celtic  mode  of  fixing  the  date  of 
Easter  [see  Epistle  of  Columbanus  among  the  Epistles  of  Gregory  the 
Great,  to  whom  it  is  addressed,  Bk.  IX,  Ep.  127,  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIII, 
p.  s^;  two  other  epistles  on  the  subject  in  MSL,  vol.  80],  his  monastic 
rule  [MSL,  80  :  209],  and  his  condemnatory  attitude  toward  the  dis- 
soluteness of  life  prevalent  in  Gaul  among  the  clergy,  as  well  as  in  the 
court.  Banished  from  Burgundy  in  610  partly  for  political  reasons, 
he  worked  for  a  time  in  the  vicinity  of  Lake  Constance.  In  612,  leav- 
ing his  disciple  Gallus  [see  Vita  S.  Galli,  by  Walafrid  Strabo,  MSL, 
114;  English  translation  by  C.  W.  Bispham,  Philadelphia,  1908],  he 
went  to  Italy  and,  having  founded  Bobbio,  died  in  615.  Gallus  {ob. 
circa  640)  subsequently  founded  the  great  monastery  of  St.  Gall  in 
Switzerland,  near  Lake  Constance.  The  Celtic  monks  on  the  conti- 
nent abandoned  their  Celtic  peculiarities  in  the  ninth  century  and 
adopted  the  Benedictine  rule. 

^  Sigibert  appears  to  have  been  born  629. 


586     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Jonas,  the  author  of  the  life  of  Columbanus,  was  a  monk  at  Bobbio. 
His  Hfe  of  Columbanus  was  written  about  640;  see  DCB,  "Jonas  (6)." 
In  the  following,  the  divisions  and  numbering  of  paragraphs  follow 
Migne's  edition.  There  is  an  excellent  new  edition  in  the  MGH,  Script, 
rerum  Merovin.,  ed.  Krusch,  8vo,  1905. 

Columbanus  sets  forth. 

Ch.  9.  Columbanus  gathered  such  treasures  of  divine  knowl- 
edge that  even  in  his  youth  he  could  expound  the  Psalter  in 
polished  discourse  and  could  make  many  other  discourses, 
worthy  of  being  sung  and  useful  to  teach.  Thereupon  he 
took  pains  to  be  received  into  the  company  of  monks,  and 
sought  the  monastery  of  Benechor  [in  Ulster]  the  head  of 
which,  the  blessed  Commogellus,  was  famous  for  his  many 
virtues.  He  was  an  excellent  father  of  his  monks  and  highly 
regarded  because  of  his  zeal  in  religion  and  the  maintenance  of 
discipKne  according  to  the  rule.  And  here  he  began  to  give 
himself  entirely  to  prayer  and  fasting  and  to  bear  the  yoke  oi 
Christ,  easy  to  those  who  bear  it,  by  denying  himself  and 
taking  up  his  cross  and  following  Christ,  that  he,  who  was  to 
be  the  teacher  of  others,  might  himself  learn  by  teaching,  and 
by  mortification  to  endure  in  his  own  body  what  he  should 
abundantly  show  forth;  and  he  who  should  teach  what  by  others 
ought  to  be  fulfilled,  himself  first  fulfilled.  When  many  years 
had  passed  for  him  in  the  cloister,  he  began  to  desire  to  wan- 
der forth,  mindful  of  the  command  which  the  Lord  gave 
Abraham:  ''Get  thee  out  of  thy  country  and  from  thy  kin- 
dred and  from  thy  father's  house  unto  a  land  that  I  will 
show  thee"  [Gen.  12:1].  He  confessed  to  Commogellus,  the 
venerable  Father,  the  warm  desire  of  his  heart,  the  desire  en- 
kindled by  the  fire  of  the  Lord  [Luke  12  :  49];  but  he  received 
no  such  answer  as  he  wished.  For  it  was  a  grief  to  Commo- 
gellus to  bear  the  loss  of  a  man  so  full  of  comfort.  Finally 
Commogellus  began  to  take  courage  and  place  it  before  his 
heart  that  he  ought  to  seek  more  to  advance  the  benefit  of 
others  than  to  pursue  his  own  needs.  It  happened  not  with- 
out the  will  of  the  Almighty,  who  had  trained  His  pupil  for 


GERMANIC   STATE   CHURCH  587 

future  wars,  that  from  his  victories  he  might  obtain  glorious 
triumphs  and  gain  joyful  victories  over  the  phalanxes  of  slain 
enemies.  The  abbot  called  Columbanus  unto  him  and  said 
that  though  it  was  a  grief  to  him  yet  he  had  come  to  a  de- 
cision useful  to  others,  that  he  would  remain  in  peace  with 
him,  would  strengthen  him  with  consolation,  and  give  him 
companions  for  his  journey  men  who  were  known  for  their 
religion.  .  .  . 

So  Columbanus  in  the  twentieth  ^  year  of  his  life  set  forth, 
and  with  twelve  companions  under  the  leadership  of  Christ 
went  down  to  the  shore  of  the  sea.  Here  they  waited  the 
grace  of  Almighty  God  that  he  would  prosper  their  undertak- 
ing, if  it  took  place  with  His  consent;  and  they  perceived  that 
the  will  of  the  merciful  Judge  was  with  them.  They  embarked 
and  began  the  dangerous  journey  through  the  straits,  and 
crossed  a  smooth  sea  with  a  favorable  wind,  and  after  a  quick 
passage  reached  the  coasts  of  Brittany.  .  .  . 

Columbanus  founds  monasteries  in  Gaul. 

Ch.  12.  At  that  time  there  was  a  wide  desert  called  Vosagus 
[the  Vosges]  in  which  there  lay  a  castle  long  since  in  ruins. 
And  ancient  tradition  called  it  Anagrates  [Anegray].  When 
the  holy  man  reached  this  place,  in  spite  of  its  wild  isolation, 
its  rudeness,  and  the  rocks,  he  settled  there  with  his  com- 
panions, content  with  meagre  support,  mindful  of  the  say- 
ing that  man  lives  not  by  bread  alone,  but,  satisfied  with  the 
Word  of  Life,  he  would  have  abundance  and  never  hunger 
again  unto  eternity. 

Ch.  17.  When  the  number  of  the  monks  had  increased  rap- 
idly, he  began  to  think  of  seeking  in  the  same  desert  for  a 
better  place,  where  he  might  found  a  monastery.  And  he 
found  a  place,  which  had  formerly  been  strongly  fortified,  at 
a  distance  from  the  first  place  about  eight  miles,  and  which 
was  called  in  ancient  times  Luxovium.^    Here  there  were 

^  Rather  the  thirtieth  according  to  some  MSS.,  which  seems  to  be  more  in 
accord  with  what  has  gone  before. 
2  Luxeuil. 


588    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

warm  baths  erected  with  special  art.  A  multitude  of  stone 
idols  stood  here  in  the  near-by  forest,  which  in  the  old  heathen 
times  had  been  honored  with  execrable  practices  and  profane 
rites.  Residing  here,  therefore,  the  excellent  man  began  to 
found  a  cloister.  On  hearing  of  this  the  people  came  to  him 
from  all  sides  in  order  to  dedicate  themselves  to  the  practice 
of  religion,  so  that  the  great  crowd  of  monks  gathered  together 
could  hardly  be  contained  in  the  company  of  one  monastery. 
Here  the  children  of  nobles  pressed  to  come,  that,  despising 
the  scorned  adornments  of  the  world  and  the  pomp  of  pres- 
ent wealth,  they  might  receive  eternal  rewards.  When 
Columbanus  perceived  this  and  that  from  all  sides  the  people 
came  together  for  the  medicines  of  penance,  and  that  the 
walls  of  one  monastery  could  not  without  difficulty  hold  so 
great  a  body  of  converts  to  the  religious  life,  and  although 
they  were  of  one  mind  and  one  heart,  yet  it  was  ill  fitted  to 
the  intercourse  of  so  great  a  multitude,  he  sought  out  another 
place,  which  was  excellent  on  account  of  its  abundance  of 
water,  and  founded  a  second  monastery,  which  he  named  Fon- 
tanae,^  and  placed  rulers  over  it,  of  whose  piety  none  doubted. 
As  he  now  settled  companies  of  monks  in  this  place,  he  dwelt 
alternately  in  each  and,  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  estab- 
lished a  rule  which  they  should  observe  that  the  prudent 
reader  or  hearer  of  it  might  know  by  what  sort  of  discipline 
a  man  might  become  holy. 

The  quarrel  of  Columbanus  with  the  Court. 

Ch.  32.  It  happened  one  day  that  the  holy  Columbanus 
came  to  Brunichildis,  who  was  at  that  time  in  Brocariaca.^ 
When  she  saw  him  coming  to  the  court  she  led  to  the  man  of 
God  the  sons  of  Theuderich,  whom  he  had  begotten  in  adul- 
tery. He  asked  as  he  saw  them  what  they  wanted  of  him,  and 
Brunichildis  said:  "They  are  the  king's  sons;  strengthen 
them  with  thy  blessing."  But  he  answered :  ''Know  then  that 
these  will  never  hold  the  royal  sceptre,  for  they  have  sprung 

1  Fontenay  or  Fontaines.  ^  Near  Autun. 


GERMANIC   STATE   CHURCH  589 

from  unchastity."  In  furious  anger  she  commanded  the 
boys  to  depart.  The  man  of  God  thereupon  left  the  royal 
court,  and  when  he  had  crossed  the  threshold  there  arose  a 
loud  roar  so  that  the  whole  house  shook,  and  all  shuddered 
for  fear;  yet  the  rage  of  the  miserable  woman  could  not  be  re- 
strained. Thereupon  she  began  to  plot  against  the  neighbor- 
ing monasteries,  and  she  caused  a  decree  to  be  issued  that  the 
monks  should  not  be  allowed  to  move  freely  outside  the  land 
of  the  monastery,  and  that  no  one  should  give  them  any  sup- 
port or  otherwise  assist  them  with  offerings. 

Ch.  33.  Against  Columbanus  Brunichildis  excited  the  mind 
of  the  king  and  endeavored  to  disturb  him;  and  she  encour- 
aged the  minds  of  his  princes,  his  courtiers,  and  great  men  to 
set  the  mind  of  the  king  against  the  man  of  God,  and  she 
began  to  urge  the  bishops  that  by  vilifying  the  religion  of 
Columbanus  they  might  dishonor  the  rule  he  had  given  his 
monks  to  observe.  .  .  . 

Columbanus  founds  Bobbie. 

§  59.  When  the  blessed  Columbanus  learned  that  Theude- 
bert  had  been  conquered  by  Theuderich,  he  left  Gaul  and 
Germany,^  which  were  under  Theuderich,  and  entered  Italy 
where  he  was  honorably  received  by  Agilulf  the  Lombard  king, 
who  gave  him  permission  to  dwell  where  he  wished  in  Italy. 
It  happened  by  the  will  of  God  that,  while  he  was  in  Milan, 
Columbanus  wishing  to  attack  and  root  out  by  the  use  of  the 
Scripture  the  errors  of  the  heretics,  that  is,  the  false  doctrine 
of  the  Arians,  lingered  and  composed  an  excellent  work  against 
them.^ 

§  60.  While  things  were  thus  going  on,  a  man  named 
Jocundus  came  before  the  king  and  reported  to  him  that  he 
knew  of  a  church  of  the  blessed  Peter,  prince  of  the  Apostles, 
in  a  desert  region  of  the  Apennines,  in  which  he  learned  that 

1  What  is  now  Switzerland  was  then  regarded  as  a  part  of  Germany,  Alle- 
mania. 

2  This  has  not  been  preserved.  But  Bobbio,  subsequently  founded,  be- 
came a  stronghold  of  the  Catholic  faith  against  Arianism. 


590    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

there  were  many  advantages,  being  uncommonly  fruitful  and 
supplied  with  water  full  of  fish.  It  was  called  in  old  time 
Bobium^  on  account  of  the  brook  which  flowed  by  it;  another 
river  in  the  neighborhood  was  called  Trebia,  on  which 
Hannibal,  spending  a  winter,  suffered  great  losses  of  men, 
horses,  and  elephants.  Thither  Columbanus  removed  and 
restored  with  all  possible  diligence  the  already  half-ruined 
church  in  all  its  former  beauty.  The  roof  and  the  top  of  the 
temple  and  the  ruins  of  the  walls  he  repaired  and  set  to  work 
to  construct  other  things  necessary  for  a  monastery. 

§  99.  Gregory  the  Great  and  the  Roman  Church  in 
THE  Second  Half  of  the  Sixth  Century. 

Gregory  the  Great  was  born  about  540.  In  573  he  was  ap- 
pointed prefect  of  the  city  of  Rome,  but  resigned  the  follow- 
ing year  to  become  a  monk.  Having  been  ordained  deacon, 
he  was  sent  in  579  to  Constantinople  as  papal  apocrisiarius,  or 
resident  ambassador  at  the  court  of  the  Emperor.  In  586  he 
was  back  in  Rome  and  abbot  of  St.  Andrew's,  and  in  590  he 
was  elected  Pope.  As  Pope  his  career  was  even  more  brilliant. 
He  reorganized  the  papal  finances,  carried  through  important 
discipKnary  measures,  and  advanced  the  cause  of  monasti- 
cism.  His  work  as  the  organizer  of  missions  in  England,  his 
labors  to  heal  the  Istrian  schism,  his  relations  with  the  Lom- 
bards, his  deahngs  with  the  Church  in  Gaul,  his  controversy 
with  Constantinople  in  the  matter  of  the  title  '^  Ecumenical 
Patriarch,"  and  other  large  relations  and  tasks  indicate  the 
range  of  his  interests  and  the  extent  of  his  activities.  As  a 
theologian  Gregory  interpreted  Augustine  for  the  Middle 
Ages  and  was  the  most  important  and  influential  theologian 
of  the  West  after  Augustine  and  before  the  greater  scholastics. 
He  did  much  to  restore  the  prestige  of  his  see,  which  had  been 
lost  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  sixth  century.     He  died  604. 

Additional  source  material:  Selections  from  the  writings  of  Gregory, 
including  many  of  his  letters,  may  be  found  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vols. 

^  Bobbie,  twenty-five  miles  southwest  from  Piacenza. 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  591 

XII  and  XIII ;  see  also  A  Library  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church  (Oxford). 

The  selections  under  this  section  are  arranged  under  four 
heads:  (i)  Relations  with  Gaul;  (2)  Relations  with  Constan- 
tinople; (3)  Relations  with  the  Schism  in  Northern  Italy;  (4) 
Relations  with  the  Lombards;  for  English  mission,  v.  infra, 
§  100. 

I.  Relations  with  Gaul. 

(a)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Vigilium,  Reg.  V,  53.    (MSL, 

77  •  782.) 

The  following  letter  was  written  in  595  in  reply  to  a  letter  from 
Vigilius,  bishop  of  Aries,  asking  for  the  pallium  (DCA,  art.  "Pallium," 
also  Cath.  Encyc.)  and  the  vicariate.  For  the  relation  of  the  Roman 
see  to  the  bishop  of  Aries  as  primate  of  Gaul,  see  E.  Loening, 
Geschichte  des  deutschen  Kirchenrechts.  The  relation  of  the  vicariate 
to  the  papacy  and  also  to  the  royal  power  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that 
the  pallium  is  given  in  response  to  the  request  of  the  king.  The  con- 
dition of  the  church  under  Childebert  is  also  shown;  see  §  98  for  canons 
bearing  on  simony  and  irregularities  in  connection  with  ordination. 

As  to  thy  having  asked  therein  [in  a  letter  of  Vigilius  to 
Gregory]  according  to  ancient  custom  for  the  use  of  the  pal- 
lium and  the  vicariate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  far  be  it  from  me 
to  suspect  that  thou  hast  sought  eminence  of  transitory 
power,  or  the  adornment  of  external  worship,  in  our  vicariate 
and  the  pallium.  But,  since  it  is  known  to  all  whence  the 
holy  faith  proceeded  in  the  regions  of  Gaul,  when  your  fra- 
ternity asks  for  a  repetition  of  the  early  custom  of  the  Apos- 
tolic See,  what  is  it  but  that  a  good  offspring  reverts  to  the 
bosom  of  its  mother?  With  wilHng  mind  therefore  we  grant 
what  has  been  requested,  lest  we  should  seem  either  to  with- 
hold from  you  anything  of  the  honor  due  to  you,  or  to 
despise  the  petition  of  our  most  excellent  son,  King  Childe- 
bert. .  .  . 

I  have  learned  from  certain  persons  informing  me  that  in  the 
parts  of  Gaul  and  Germany  no  one  attains  to  holy  orders 
except  for  a  consideration  given.     If  this  is  so,  I  say  it  with 


592    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

tears,  I  declare  it  with  groans,  that,  when  the  priestly  order 
has  fallen  inwardly,  neither  will  it  be  able  to  stand  outwardly 
for  long.  .  .  . 

Another  very  detestable  thing  has  also  been  reported  to 
us,  that  some  persons  being  laymen,  through  the  desire  of 
temporal  glory,  are  tonsured  on  the  death  of  bishops,  and  all 
at  once  are  made  priests.  .  .  . 

On  this  account  your  fraternity  must  needs  take  care  to 
admonish  our  most  excellent  son.  King  Childebert,  that  he 
remove  entirely  the  stain  of  this  sin  from  his  kingdom,  to  the 
end  that  Almighty  God  may  give  him  so  much  the  greater 
recompense  with  himself  as  He  sees  him  both  love  what  He 
loves  and  shun  what  He  hates. 

And  so  we  commit  to  your  fraternity,  according  to  ancient 
custom,  under  God,  our  vicariate  in  the  churches  which  are 
under  the  dominion  of  our  most  excellent  son  Childebert,  with 
the  understanding  that  their  proper  dignity,  according  to 
primitive  usage,  be  preserved  to  the  several  metropolitans. 
We  have  also  sent  a  pallium  which  thy  fraternity  will  use 
within  the  Church  for  the  solemnization  of  mass  only.  Fur- 
ther, if  any  of  the  bishops  should  by  any  chance  wish  to  travel 
to  any  considerable  distance,  let  it  not  be  lawful  for  him  to 
remove  to  other  places  without  the  authority  of  thy  hohness. 
If  any  question  of  faith,  or  it  may  be  relating  to  other  matters, 
should  have  arisen  among  the  bishops,  which  cannot  easily  be 
settled,  let  it  be  ventilated  and  decided  in  an  assembly  of 
twelve  bishops.  But  if  it  cannot  be  decided  after  the  truth 
has  been  investigated,  let  it  be  referred  to  our  judgment. 

2.  Relations  with  Constantinople. 

(b)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Johannem  Jejunatorem, 
Reg.  V,  44.     (MSL,  77  :  738.)     C/.  Mirbt,  n.  180. 

On  the  title  "Ecumenical  Patriarch." 

The  controversy  over  the  title  "Ecumenical  Patriarch"  was  a  re- 
sult of  Gregory's  determination  to  carry  through,  as  far  as  possible,  the 
Petrine  rights  and  duties  as  he  conceived  them.     The  title  was  prob- 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  593 

ably  intended  to  mark  the  superiority  of  Constantinople  to  the  other 
patriarchates  in  the  East,  according  to  the  Eastern  principle  that  the 
political  rank  of  a  city  determined  its  ecclesiastical  rank.  It  seemed 
to  Gregory  to  imply  a  position  of  superiority  to  the  see  of  Peter.  As 
it  certainly  might  imply  that,  he  consistently  opposed  it.  But  it  had 
been  a  title  in  use  for  nearly  a  century.  (C/.  Gieseler,  KG,  Eng.  trans., 
vol.  I,  p.  504.)  Justinian  in  533  so  styled  the  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople (Cod.  I,  I,  7).  For  the  difference  in  point  of  view  between  the 
East  and  the  West  as  to  rank  of  great  sees,  see  Leo's  letters  on 
the  28th  canon  of  Chalcedon,  A.  D.  451,  supra,  in  §  86. 

At  the  time  when  your  fraternity  was  advanced  in  sacer- 
dotal dignity,  you  recall  what  peace  and  concord  of  the 
churches  you  found.  But,  with  what  daring  or  with  what 
swelling  of  pride  I  know  not,  you  have  attempted  to  seize 
upon  a  new  name  for  yourself,  whereby  the  hearts  of  all 
your  brethren  would  be  offended.  I  wonder  exceedingly  at 
this,  since  I  remember  that  in  order  not  to  attain  to  the 
episcopal  office  thou  wouldest  have  fled.  But  now  that  thou 
hast  attained  unto  it,  thou  desirest  so  to  exercise  it  as  if 
thou  hadst  run  after  it  with  ambitious  desire.  And  thou  who 
didst  confess  thyself  unworthy  to  be  called  a  bishop,  hast  at 
length  been  brought  to  such  a  pitch  that,  despising  thy  breth- 
ren, thou  desirest  to  be  named  the  only  bishop.  And  in 
regard  to  this  matter,  weighty  letters  were  sent  to  thy 
holiness  by  my  predecessor  Pelagius,  of  holy  memory,  and  in 
them  he  annulled  the  acts  of  the  synod, ^  which  had  been  as- 
sembled among  you  in  the  case  of  our  former  brother  and 
fellow  priest,  Gregory,  because  of  that  execrable  title  of  pride, 
and  forbade  the  archdeacon  whom  he  sent  according  to 
custom  to  the  feet  of  our  Lord  ^  to  celebrate  the  solemnities 
of  the  mass  with  thee.  But  after  his  death,  when  I,  an  un- 
worthy man,  succeeded  to  the  government  of  the  Church,  I 
took  care,  formerly  through  thy  representatives,  and  now 
through  our  common  son  and  deacon,  Sabianus,  to  address  thy 
fraternity,  not  indeed  in  writing,  but  by  word  of  mouth,  desir- 
ing thee  to  refrain  thyself  from  such  presumption;   and  in 

^Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  VI.  7. 

2/.  e.,  to  be  the  apocrisiarius  at  the  court  of  the  Emperor. 


594    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

case  thou  wouldest  not  amend  I  forbade  his  celebrating  the 
solemnities  of  the  mass  with  thee;  that  so  I  might  appeal  to 
thy  holiness  through  a  certain  sense  of  shame,  and  then,  if 
the  execrable  and  profane  assumption  could  not  be  corrected 
through  shame,  I  might  resort  to  canonical  and  prescribed 
measures.  And  because  sores  that  are  to  be  cut  away  should 
first  be  stroked  with  a  gentle  hand,  I  beg  of  thee,  I  beseech 
thee,  and,  as  kindly  as  I  can,  I  demand  of  thee  that  thy  fra- 
ternity rebuke  all  who  flatter  thee  and  offer  thee  this  name  of 
error,  and  not  consent  to  be  called  by  a  fooHsh  and  proud 
title.  For  truly  I  say  it  weeping,  and  out  of  deepest  sorrow  of 
heart  attribute  it  to  my  sins,  that  this  my  brother,  who  has 
been  placed  in  the  episcopal  order,  that  he  might  bring  back 
the  souls  of  others  to  humility,  has,  up  to  the  present  time, 
been  incapable  of  being  brought  back  to  humility;  that  he 
who  teaches  truth  to  others  has  not  consented  to  teach  him- 
self, even  when  I  implore  him. 

Consider,  I  pray  thee,  that  by  this  rash  presumption  the 
peace  of  the  whole  Church  is  disturbed,  and  that  it  is  in  con- 
tradiction to  the  grace  poured  out  on  all  in  common;  in  which 
grace  thou  thyself  wilt  be  able  to  grow  so  far  as  thou  thyself 
will  determine  to  do  so.  And  thou  wilt  become  by  so  much 
the  greater  as  thou  restrainest  thyself  from  the  usurpation  of 
proud  and  foolish  titles;  and  thou  wilt  advance  in  proportion 
as  thou  art  not  bent  on  arrogation  by  the  humiliation  of  thy 
brethren.  .  .  .  Certainly  Peter,  the  first  of  the  Apostles,  was 
a  member  of  the  holy  and  universal  Church;  Paul,  Andrew, 
John — what  are  they  but  the  heads  of  particular  communities? 
And  yet  all  are  members  under  one  Head.  And  to  bind  all 
together  in  a  short  phrase,  the  saints  before  the  Law,  the 
saints  under  the  Law,  the  saints  under  grace,  all  these  making 
up  the  Lord's  body  were  constituted  as  members  of  the 
Church,  and  not  one  of  them  has  ever  wished  himself  to  be 
called  '' universal.".  .  . 

Is  it  not  the  fact,  as  your  fraternity  knows,  that  the  prel- 
ates of  this  ApostoKc  See,  which  by  the  providence  of  God  I 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  595 

serve,  had  the  honor  offered  them  by  the  venerable  Council  of 
Chalcedon  of  being  called  ''universal"?^  But  yet  not  one 
of  them  has  ever  wished  to  be  called  by  such  a  title,  or 
seized  upon  this  rash  name,  lest,  if  in  virtue  of  the  rank  of 
the  pontificate,  he  took  to  himself  the  glory  of  singularity,  he 
might  seem  to  have  denied  it  to  all  his  brethren. 

(c)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Phocam,  Reg.  XIII,  31. 
(MSL,  77  :i28i.) 

Epistle  to  Phocas  congratulating  him  on  his  accession. 

Phocas  (602-610)  was  a  low-born,  ignorant  centurion  whom  chance 
had  placed  at  the  head  of  a  successful  rebellion  originating  in  the  army 
of  the  Danube.  The  rebellion  was  successful,  and  the  Emperor  Mau- 
rice was  murdered,  together  with  his  sons.  Maurice  had  been  un- 
successful in  war,  unpopular  with  the  army,  and  his  financial  measures 
had  been  oppressive.  Phocas  was  utterly  incompetent  as  a  ruler, 
licentious  and  sanguinary  as  a  man.  His  reign  was  a  period  of  horror 
and  blood. 

Gregory  to  Phocas.  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  who,  ac- 
cording as  it  is  written,  changes  times,  and  transfers  kingdoms, 
because  He  has  made  apparent  to  all  what  He  has  vouchsafed 
to  speak  by  His  prophet,  that  the  most  High  ruleth  in  the  king- 
dom of  men,  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  He  will  [Dan. 
4  :  17].  For  in  the  incomprehensible  dispensation  of  Almighty 
God  there  is  an  alternating  control  of  human  life,  and  some- 
times, when  the  sins  of  many  are  to  be  smitten,  one  is  raised 
up  through  whose  hardness  the  necks  of  subjects  may  be 
bowed  down  under  the  yoke  of  tribulation,  as  in  our  affliction 
we  have  long  had  proof.  But  sometimes,  when  the  rnerciful 
God  has  decreed  to  refresh  with  His  consolation  the  mourn- 
ing hearts  of  many,  He  advances  one  to  the  summit  of  govern- 
ment, and  through  the  bowels  of  His  mercy  infuses  in  the 
minds  of  all  the  grace  of  exultation  in  Him.  In  which  abun- 
dance of  exultation  we  believe  that  we,  who  rejoice  that  the 
benignity  of  your  piety  has  arrived  at  imperial  supremacy, 
shall  speedily  be  confirmed.  "Let  the  heavens  rejoice  and  let 
the  earth  be  glad"  [Psalm  96  :  11],  and  let  the  whole  people 

^See  Gieseler,  KG,  Eng.  trans.  I,  p.  396,  n.  72. 


596    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

of  the  republic,  hitherto  afflicted  exceedingly,  grow  cheerful 
for  your  benignant  deeds.  Let  the  proud  minds  of  enemies 
be  subdued  to  the  yoke  of  your  domination.  Let  the  sad  and 
depressed  spirit  of  subjects  be  relieved  by  your  mercy.  Let 
the  power  of  heavenly  grace  make  you  terrible  to  your  en- 
emies; let  piety  make  you  kind  to  your  subjects.  Let  the 
whole  republic  have  rest  in  your  most  happy  times,  since  the 
pillage  of  peace  under  the  color  of  legal  processes  has  been 
exposed.  Let  plottings  about  testaments  cease,  and  benev- 
olences extorted  by  violence  end.  Let  secure  possession  of 
their  own  goods  return  to  all,  that  they  may  rejoice  in  pos- 
sessing without  fear  what  they  have  acquired  without  fraud. 
Let  every  single  person's  liberty  be  now  at  length  restored 
to  each  one  under  the  yoke  of  the  holy  Empire.  For  there  is 
this  difference  between  the  kings  of  the  nations  and  the  em- 
perors of  the  republic:  the  kings  of  the  nations  are  lords  of 
slaves,  but  the  emperors  lords  of  free  men.  But  we  shall 
better  speak  of  these  things  by  praying  than  by  putting  you 
in  mind  of  them.  May  Almighty  God  keep  the  heart  of  your 
piety  in  the  hand  of  His  grace  in  every  thought  and  deed. 
Whatsoever  things  should  be  done  justly,  whatever  things 
with  clemency,  may  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  dwells  in  your 
breast  direct,  that  your  clemency  may  both  be  exalted  in  a 
temporal  kingdom  and  after  the  course  of  many  years  at- 
tain to  heavenly  kingdoms.  Given  in  the  month  June,  in- 
diction  six. 

3.     Gregory  and  the  Schism  in  North  Italy. 

Among  the  results  of  the  Fifth  General  Council  of  Constantinople, 
553,  was  a  wide-spread  schism  in  the  northern  part  of  Italy  and  adjacent 
lands.  The  bishops  of  the  western  part  of  Lombardy,  under  the  lead 
of  the  bishop  of  Milan,  together  with  the  bishops  of  Venetia,  Istria, 
and  a  portion  of  lUyricum,  Rhaetia  Secunda,  and  Noricum,  under  the 
bishop  of  Aquileia,  renounced  communion  with  the  see  of  Rome,  and 
became  autocephaKc.  Even  bishops  in  Tuscany  abandoned  com- 
munion with  the  see  of  Rome  because  the  council  and  Vigilius  had 
condemned  Theodore,  Theodoret,  and  Ibas  {v.  supra,  §  93).  Justin 
II  attempted  to  heal  the  schism,  and  his  verbose  edict  may  be  found 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  597 

in  Evagrius,  Hist.  Ec,  V,  4.  A  serious  problem  was  presented  to  the 
Roman  see.  In  dealing  with  them,  however,  it  was  possible  to  treat 
each  group  separately.  On  account  of  the  Lombard  invasion  the 
bishop  of  Aquileia  removed  his  see  to  Grado.  Gregory  the  Great  had 
some  success  in  drawing  the  schismatics  into  more  friendly  relations. 
But  not  till  612  was  the  see  of  Aquileia-Grado  in  communion  with  Rome. 
A  rival  bishop  was  elected,  who  removed  his  see  to  old  Aquileia.  See 
extract  from  Paulus  Diaconus  (/).  And  the  opposition  was  main- 
tained until  about  700.  The  Milanese  portion  of  the  schism  had  long 
since  ended.  Of  Gregory's  epistles  several  bearing  on  the  schism  are 
available  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vols.  XII  and  XIII:  Reg.  I,  16;  II,  46, 
51;  IV,  2,  38,  39;  V,  51;  IX,  9,  10;  XIII,  sz- 

(d)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Constantium,  Reg.  IV,  2. 
(MSL,  77  :  669.) 

Gregory  to  Constantius,  Bishop  of  Milan.  My  beloved 
son,  the  deacon  Boniface,  has  given  me  information  from  a 
private  letter  of  thy  fraternity:  namely,  that  three  bishops, 
having  sought  out  rather  than  having  found  an  occasion,  have 
separated  themselves  from  the  pious  communion  of  thy  fra- 
ternity, saying  that  thou  hast  assented  to  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  three  chapters  and  hast  given  a  solemn  pledge. 
And,  indeed,  whether  there  has  been  any  mention  made  of  the 
three  chapters  in  any  word  or  writing  whatever,  thy  frater- 
nity remembers  well;  although  thy  fraternity's  predecessor, 
Laurentius  {circa  573),  did  send  a  most  strict  security  to  the 
Apostolic  See,  and  to  it  a  legal  number  of  the  most  noble  men 
subscribed;  among  whom,  I  also,  at  that  time  holding  the 
praetorship  of  the  city,  likewise  subscribed;  because,  when 
such  a  schism  had  taken  place  about  nothing,  it  was  right  that 
the  ApostoHc  See  should  be  careful  to  guard  in  all  respects 
the  unity  of  the  universal  Church  in  the  minds  of  priests. 
But  as  to  its  being  said  that  our  daughter.  Queen  Theodelinda,^ 
after  hearing  this  news  has  withdrawn  herself  from  thy  com- 
munion, it  is  perfectly  evident  that  though  she  has  been  se- 
duced to  some  Httle  extent  by  the  words  of  wicked  men,  yet 

^  Theodelinda  held  to  the  schismatic  party  in  Northern  Italy.  Gregory  is 
careful  to  touch  this  point  very  delicately,  and  not  to  allow  it  to  become  such  a 
point  of  contention  as  might  disturb  favorable  political  relations. 


598    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

when  Hippolytus  the  notary  and  John  the  abbot  arrive,  she 
will  seek  in  all  ways  the  communion  of  thy  fraternity. 

{e)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Constantium,  Reg.  IV,  39. 

(MSL,  77  :  713.) 

In  reply  to  a  letter  from  Constantius  of  Milan  informing  Gregory 
that  the  demand  had  been  made  upon  him  by  the  clergy  of  Brescia  that 
he  should  take  an  oath  that  he,  Constantius,  had  not  condemned  the 
Three  Chapters,  i.  e.,  had  not  accepted  the  Fifth  General  Council, 
Gregory  advises  him  to  take  no  such  oath. 

But  lest  those  who  have  thus  written  to  you  should  be  of- 
fended, send  them  a  letter  declaring  under  an  imposition  of  an 
anathema  that  you  neither  take  away  anything  from  the  faith 
of  the  synod  of  Chalcedon  nor  receive  those  who  do,  and  that 
you  condemn  whatsoever  it  condemned  and  absolve  whatso- 
ever it  absolved.  And  thus  I  believe  that  they  may  soon  be 
satisfied.  ...  As  to  what  you  have  written  to  the  effect  that 
you  are  unwilling  to  transmit  my  letter  to  Queen  Theodelinda 
on  the  ground  that  the  fifth  synod  is  named  in  it,  for  you  be- 
lieved that  she  might  be  offended,  you  did  right  not  to  trans- 
mit it.  We  are  therefore  doing  now  as  you  recommended, 
namely,  only  expressing  approval  of  the  four  synods.  Yet 
as  to  the  synod  which  was  afterward  called  at  Constanti- 
nople, which  is  called  by  many  the  fifth,  I  would  have  you 
know  that  it  neither  ordained  nor  held  anything  in  opposition 
to  the  four  most  holy  synods,  seeing  that  nothing  was  done  in 
it  with  respect  to  the  faith,  but  only  with  respect  to  three 
persons,  about  whom  nothing  is  contained  in  the  acts  of  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon;^  but  after  the  canons  had  been  pro- 
mulgated, discussion  arose,  and  final  action  was  ventilated 
concerning  persons. 

1  Gregory  is  not  correct  here.  In  the  eighth,  ninth,  and  tenth  sessions  of  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon,  the  cases  of  Theodoret  and  Ibas  were  examined,  they 
were  heard  in  their  own  defence  and  were  acquitted  or  excused  without  censure. 
See  Hefele,  §§  195,  196.  The  case  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  however,  did 
not  come  before  the  Council  of  Chalcedon,  because  he  was  dead,  v.  supra,  §  93, 
the  Constitiitutn  of  Vigilius. 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  599 

(/)  Paulus  Diaconus,  Historia  Langobardorum,  IV,  32,  33, 

36.     (MSL,  95  :  657-) 

The  continuation  of  the  schism  in  Istria  and  the  rise  of  the  two 
patriarchates  of  Aquileia.  The  Emperor  Phocas  and  the  title  "  Head 
of  All  the  Churches." 

32.  In  the  following  month  of  November  [A.  D.  605] 
King  Agilulf  concluded  peace  with  the  Patrician  Smaragdus 
for  a  year,  and  received  from  the  Romans  twelve  thousand 
solidi.  Also  the  Tuscan  cities  Balneus  Regis  [Bagnarea]  and 
Urbs  Vetus  [Orvieto]  were  conquered  by  the  Lombards.  Then 
appeared  in  the  heavens  in  the  months  of  April  and  May  a 
star  which  is  called  a  comet.  Thereupon  King  Agilulf  again 
made  a  peace  with  the  Romans  for  three  years. 

33.  In  the  same  days  after  the  death  of  the  patriarch 
Severus,  the  abbot  John  was  made  patriarch  of  old  Aquileia 
in  his  place  with  the  approval  of  the  king  and  Duke  Gisulf. 
Also  in  Grados  [Grado]  the  Roman^  Candidianus  was  ap- 
pointed bishop.  In  the  months  of  November  and  December  a 
comet  was  again  visible.  After  the  death  of  Candidianus, 
Epiphanius,  who  had  formerly  been  the  papal  chief  notary, 
was  elected  patriarch  by  the  bishops  who  stood  under  the 
Romans;   and  since  this  time  there  were  two  patriarchs. 

36.  Phocas,  as  also  has  been  related  above,  after  the  mur- 
der of  Maurice  and  his  sons,  obtained  the  Roman  Empire  and 
ruled  for  eight  years.  At  the  request  of  Pope  Boniface^  he 
decreed  that  the  seat  of  the  Roman  and  ApostoHc  Church 
should  be  the  head  of  all  churches  [caput  omnium  ecclesiarum], 
because  the  Church  of  Constantinople  in  a  proclamation  had 
named  itself  first  of  all.  At  the  request  of  another  Pope  Boni- 
face,^ he  commanded  that  the  idolatrous  rubbish  should  be 
removed  from  the  old  temple  which  bore  the  name  of  the 
Pantheon,  and  from  it  a  church  should  be  made  to  the  holy 
Virgin  Mary  and  all  martyrs,  so  that  where  formerly  the  serv- 

^  /.  e.,  in  communion  with  the  Roman  see.  ^  Boniface  III,  606-607. 

3  Boniface  IV,  607-615. 


6oo    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

ice  not  of  all  gods  but  of  all  idols  was  celebrated,  now  only 
the  memory  of  all  saints  should  be  found. 

4.  Gregory  the  Great  and  the  Lombards. 

The  Lombards  entered  Italy  568,  and  gradually  spread  over  nearly- 
all  the  peninsula.  The  territories  retained  by  the  Emperor  from  the 
conquests  of  Justinian  were  only  the  Exachate  of  Ravenna,  the  Duca- 
tus  Romanus,  and  the  Ducatus  NeapoHtanus,  the  extreme  southern 
parts  of  the  peninsula  and  Liguria.  The  Lombards  were  the  last  Ger- 
manic tribe  to  settle  within  the  Empire,  and  like  so  many  others  they 
were  Arians.  TheodeHnda,  the  queen  of  the  Lombards,  was  a  Bava- 
rian princess  and  a  Catholic.  Her  second  husband,  Agilulf,  seems  to 
have  been  favorably  disposed  to  Catholicism,  far  more  so  than  Authari, 
her  first  husband. 

{g)  Paulus  Diaconus,  Historia  Langobardorum,  IV,  5-9. 
(MSL,  95  :  540.) 

Paulus  Warnefridi,  known  as  Paulus  Diaconus  (circa  720-circa  800), 
was  himself  a  Lombard,  and  in  writing  his  History  of  the  Lombards 
shows  himself  the  patriot  as  well  as  the  loyal  son  of  the  Roman  Church. 
To  do  this  was  at  times  difficult.  The  work  is  one  of  the  most  attract- 
ive histories  written  in  the  Middle  Ages.  For  nearly  all  of  his  his- 
tory, Paulus  is  dependent  upon  older  sources,  but  he  restates  the  older 
accounts  in  clear  and  careful  fashion.  The  connection  between  the 
various  extracts  is  not  always  fehcitous,  yet  he  has  succeeded  in 
producing  one  of  the  great  books  of  history.  For  an  analysis  of  the 
sources,  see  F.  H.  B.  Daniell,  art.  "Paulus  (70)  Diaconus"  in  DCB. 
The  best  edition  is  that  by  Bethmann  and  Waitz  in  the  MGH,  Scrip- 
tores  rerum  Langobardorum  et  Italicarum  scbc.  VI-IX,  also  in  the 
8vo  edition.  There  is  an  English  translation  of  the  entire  work  in  the 
Translations  and  Reprints  of  the  Historical  Department  of  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania. 

5.  At  that  time  the  learned  and  pious  Pope  Gregory,  after 
he  had  already  written  much  for  the  benefit  of  the  holy 
Church,  wrote  also  four  books  concerning  the  Hves  of  the 
saints;  these  books  he  called  Dialogus,  that  is,  conversation, 
because  in  them  he  has  introduced  himself  speaking  with  his 
deacon  Peter.  The  Pope  sent  these  books  to  Queen  Theo- 
deHnda, whom  he  knew  to  be  true  in  the  faith  in  Christ  and 
abounding  in  good  works. 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  6oi 

6.  Through  this  queen  the  Church  of  God  obtained  many 
and  great  advantages.  For  the  Lombards,  when  they  were  still 
held  by  heathen  unbelief,  had  taken  possession  of  the  entire 
property  of  the  Church.  But,  induced  by  successful  requests 
of  the  queen,  the  king,  holding  fast  to  the  Catholic  faith,^ 
gave  the  Church  of  Christ  many  possessions  and  assigned  to 
the  bishops,  who  had  theretofore  been  oppressed  and  despised, 
their  ancient  place  of  honor  once  more. 

7.  In  these  days  Tassilo  was  made  king  of  Bavaria  by  the 
Prankish  king  Childebert.  With  an  army  he  immediately 
marched  into  the  land  of  the  Slavs,  and  with  great  booty  re- 
turned to  his  own  land. 

9.  At  the  same  time  the  patrician  and  exarch  of  Ravenna, 
Romanus,^  went  to  Rome.  On  his  return  to  Ravenna  he 
took  possession  of  the  cities  which  had  been  taken  by  the 
Lombards.  The  names  of  them  are:  Sutrium  [Sutri],  Poli- 
marcium  [near  Bomarzio  and  west  of  Orte],  Horta  [Orte], 
Tuder  [Todi],  Ameria  [Amelia],  Perusia  [Perugia],  LuceoH 
[near  Gubbio],  and  several  others.  When  King  Agilulf 
received  word  of  this,  he  at  once  marched  forth  from 
Ticinus  with  a  strong  army  and  pitched  before  the  city 
of  Perusia.  Here  he  besieged  several  days  the  Lombard 
duke  Marisio,  who  had  gone  over  to  the  side  of  the  Ro- 
mans, took  him  prisoner,  and  without  delay  had  him  exe- 
cuted. On  the  approach  of  the  king,  the  holy  Pope  Gregory 
was  so  filled  with  fear  that,  as  he  himself  reports  in  his  homi- 
lies, he  broke  off  the  explanation  of  the  temple,  to  be  read 
about  in  Ezekiel;  King  Agilulf  returned  to  Ticinus  after 
he  had  settled  the  matter,  and  not  long  after,  chiefly  on  ac- 
count of  the  entreaties  of  his  wife,  Queen  Theodelinda,  who 
had  often  been  advised  in  letters  by  the  holy  Father  Gregory 
to  do  so,  he  concluded  with  Gregory  and  the  Romans  a  last- 

^He  was  not  a  professed  Catholic.  It  probably  means  either  that  he  held 
fast  to  his  political  alliance  with  Rome,  or  that  he  was  determined  to  favor 
the  Catholic  faith  professed  by  his  spouse. 

2  There  are  several  letters  written  by  Gregory  to  Romanus  available  in  trans- 
lation, see  above. 


6o2     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

ing  peace.     To  thank  her  for  this,  the  venerable  priest  sent 
the  following  letter  to  the  queen: 

Gregory  to  Theodelinda,  queen  of  the  Lombards.  How 
your  excellency  has  labored  earnestly  and  kindly,  as  is  your 
wont,  for  the  conclusion  of  peace,  we  have  learned  from  the 
report  of  our  son,  the  abbot  Probus.  Nor,  indeed,  was  it 
otherwise  to  be  expected  of  your  Christianity  than  that  you 
would  in  all  ways  show  assiduity  and  goodness  in  the  cause  of 
peace.  Wherefore,  we  give  thanks  to  Almighty  God,  who  so 
rules  your  heart  with  His  lovingkindness  that,  as  He  has  given 
you  a  right  faith,  so  He  also  grants  you  to  work  always  what 
is  pleasing  in  His  sight.  For  you  may  be  assured,  most  excel- 
lent daughter,  that  for  the  saving  of  much  bloodshed  on  both 
sides  you  have  acquired  no  small  reward.  On  this  account, 
returning  thanks  for  your  good-will,  we  implore  the  mercy  of 
God  to  repay  you  with  good  in  body  and  soul  here  and  in  the 
world  to  come.  Moreover,  greeting  you  with  fatherly  affec- 
tion, we  exhort  you  so  to  deal  with  your  most  excellent  con- 
sort that  he  may  not  reject  the  alliance  of  the  Christian  re- 
public. For,  as  I  believe  you  yourself  know,  it  is  in  many 
ways  profitable  that  he  should  be  incHned  to  betake  himself 
to  its  friendship.  Do  you  then,  after  your  manner,  always 
strive  for  what  tends  to  good-will  and  conciliation  between  the 
parties,  and  labor  wherever  an  occasion  of  reaping  a  reward 
presents  itself,  that  you  may  commend  your  good  deeds  the 
more  before  the  eyes  of  Almighty  God. 

§  loo.    The   Foundation   of   the   Anglo-Saxon   Church 

The  Anglo-Saxon  Church  owes  its  foundation  to  the  mis- 
sionary zeal  and  wise  direction  of  Gregory  the  Great.  Au- 
gustine, whom  Gregory  sent,  arrived  in  the  kingdom  of  Kent 
597,  and  established  himself  at  Canterbury.  In  625,  Pauhnus 
began  his  work  at  York,  and  Christianity  was  accepted  by  the 
Northumbrian  king  and  many  nobles.  On  the  death  of  King 
Eadwine,  Paulinus  was  obliged  to  leave  the  kingdom.     Mis- 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    603 

sionaries  were  brought  into  Northumbria  in  635  from  the 
Celtic  Church,  the  centre  of  which  was  at  lona,  where  the 
new  king  Oswald  had  taken  refuge  on  the  death  of  Eadwine. 
Aidan  now  became  the  leader  of  the  Northern  Church.  As 
the  Christianization  of  the  land  advanced  and  Roman  cus- 
toms were  introduced  into  the  northern  kingdom,  practical 
inconveniences  as  to  the  different  methods  of  reckoning  the 
date  of  Easter,  in  which  the  North  Irish  and  the  Celts  of  Scot- 
land differed  from  the  rest  of  the  Christian  Church,  came  to 
a  settlement  of  the  difhculty  at  Streaneshalch,  or  Whitby,  664. 
Colman,  Bishop  of  Lindisfarne,  the  leader  of  the  Celtic  party, 
withdrew,  and  Wilfrid,  afterward  bishop  of  York,  took  the 
lead  under  the  influence  of  the  Roman  tradition.  The  Church 
of  the  Anglo-Saxon  kingdoms,  now  in  agreement  as  to  custom, 
was  organized  by  Theodore  of  Canterbury  (668-690),  and  de- 
veloped a  remarkable  intellectual  life,  becoming,  in  fact,  for 
the  first  part  at  least  of  the  eighth  century,  the  centre  of 
Western  theological  and  hterary  culture. 

Additional  source  material:  Bede,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  English 
People,  for  editions,  v.  supra,  §  96.  This  is  the  best  account  extant  of 
the  conversion  of  a  nation  to  Christianity.  H.  Gee  and  W.  J.  Hardy, 
Documents  Illustrative  of  English  Church  History,  London,  1896;  A.  W. 
Haddan  and  W.  Stubbs,  Councils  and  Ecclesiastical  Documetits,  1869  Jf. 

(a)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  I,  29.      (MSL,  95  :69.) 

The  scheme  of  Gregory  the  Great  for  the  organization  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church  A.  D.  601. 

Gregory,  in  planning  his  mission,  seems  not  to  have  been  aware  of 
the  profound  changes  in  the  kingdom  resulting  from  the  Anglo-Saxon 
invasion.  He  selected  York  as  the  seat  of  an  archbishop,  because  it 
was  the  ancient  capital  of  the  Roman  province  in  the  North,  and  London, 
because  it  was  the  great  city  of  the  South.  The  rivalries  of  the  two 
archbishops  caused  difficulties  for  centuries,  and  was  a  hinderance  to 
the  efficiency  of  the  ecclesiastical  system.  By  this  letter,  the  British 
bishops  were  to  be  under  the  authority  of  Augustine,  a  position  which 
was  distasteful  to  the  British,  who  were  extremely  hostile  to  the  Anglo- 
Saxons,  and  incomprehensible  to  them,  as  they  saw  no  reason  or  jus- 
tification in  any  such  arrangement  without  their  consent.  They  with- 
drew from  all  intercourse  with  the  new  Anglo-Saxon  Church  and 
retired  into  Wales. 


6o4    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

To  the  most  reverend  and  holy  brother  and  fellow  bishop, 
Augustine,  Gregory,  servant  of  the  servants  of  God. 

Although  it  is  certain  that  the  unspeakable  rewards  of  the 
eternal  kingdom  are  laid  up  for  those  who  labor  for  Almighty 
God,  yet  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  render  to  them  the  benefits 
of  honors,  that  from  this  recompense  they  may  be  able  to 
labor  more  abundantly  in  the  zeal  for  spiritual  work.  And 
because  the  new  Church  of  the  English  has  been  brought  by 
thee  to  the  grace  of  Almighty  God,  by  the  bounty  of  the  same 
Lord  and  by  your  toil,  we  grant  you  the  use  of  the  pallium, 
in  the  same  to  perform  only  the  solemnities  of  the  mass,  in 
order  that  in  the  various  places  you  ordain  twelve  bishops  who 
shall  be  under  your  authority,  so  that  the  bishop  of  the  city  of 
London  ought  always  thereafter  to  be  consecrated  by  his 
own  synod  and  receive  the  pallium  of  honor  from  the  holy 
Apostolic  See,  which  by  God's  authority  I  serve. ^  Moreover, 
we  will  that  you  send  to  York  a  bishop  whom  you  shall  see 
fit  to  ordain,  yet  so  that  if  the  same  city  shall  have  received 
the  word  of  God  along  with  the  neighboring  places,  he  shall 
ordain  twelve  other  bishops,  and  enjoy  the  honor  of  metro- 
politan, because  if  our  life  last,  we  intend,  with  the  Lord's 
favor,  to  give  him  the  palHum  also.  And  we  will  that  he  be 
subject  to  your  authority,  my  brother.  But  after  your  de- 
cease he  shall  preside  over  the  bishops  he  has  ordained,  so 
that  he  shall  not  be  subject  in  anywise  to  the  bishop  of  Lon- 
don. Moreover,  let  there  be  a  distinction  of  honor  between  the 
bishops  of  the  city  of  London  and  of  York,  in  such  a  way  that 
he  shall  take  the  precedence  who  has  been  ordained. first.  But 
let  them  arrange  in  concord  by  common  counsel  and  har- 
monious action  the  things  which  need  to  be  done  for  the  zeal 
for  Christ;  let  them  determine  rightly  and  let  them  accom- 
plish what  they  have  decided  upon  without  any  mutual  mis- 
understandings. 

But  you,  my  brother,  shall  have  subject  to  you  not  only  the 

^  Augustine  had  been  consecrated  in  Gaul.  His  successors  in  the  see  of  Lon- 
don were  to  be  consecrated  by  the  sufifragans  of  that  archiepiscopal  see. 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    605 

bishops  whom  you  have  ordained  and  those  ordained  by  the 
bishop  of  York,  but  also,  by  the  authority  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  priests  [i.  e.,  the  bishops]  of  Britain;  so  that  from 
the  lips  of  your  holiness  they  may  receive  the  form  both  of 
correct  faith  and  of  holy  life,  and  fulfilling  the  duties  of  their 
office  in  faith  and  morals  may,  when  the  Lord  wills,  attain 
to  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  May  God  keep  you  safe,  most 
reverend  brother.  Dated  the  2 2d  June  in  the  nineteenth  year 
of  the  reign  of  Mauritius  Tiberius,  the  most  pious  Augustus, 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  consulship  of  the  same  Lord, 
indiction  four. 

(b)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  111,  25  /.     (MSL,  95  :  158.) 

The  Easter  dispute  and  the  synod  of  Whitby.  The  triumph  of  the 
Roman  tradition. 

The  sharpest  dispute  between  the  Celtic  and  the  Roman  churches 
was  on  the  date  of  Easter  as  presenting  the  most  inconveniences.  The 
principal  points  were  as  follows:  Both  parties  agreed  that  it  must 
be  on  Sunday,  in  the  third  week  of  the  first  lunar  month,  and  the 
paschal  full  moon  must  not  fall  before  the  vernal  equinox.  But  the 
Celts  placed  the  vernal  equinox  on  March  25,  and  the  Romans  on 
March  21.  The  Celts,  furthermore,  reckoned  as  the  third  week  the 
14th  to  the  20th  days  of  the  moon  inclusive;  the  Romans  the  15th  to 
the  2 1  St  inclusive.  The  Irish  Church  in  the  southern  part  of  Ireland 
had  already  adopted  the  Roman  reckoning  at  the  synod  of  Leighlin, 
630-633  [Hefele,  §  289].  The  occasion  of  the  difference  of  custom 
was,  in  reality,  that  the  Romans  had  adopted  in  the  previous  cen- 
tury a  more  correct  method  of  reckoning  and  one  that  had  fewer 
practical  inconveniences.  For  a  statement  by  a  Celt,  see  Epistle 
of  Columbanus  to  Gregory  the  Great,  in  the  latter's  EpistolcB,  Reg. 
IX,  Ep.  127  (PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIII,  p.  38).  In  the  following 
selection  space  has  been  saved  by  omissions  which  are,  however, 
indicated. 

At  this  time  [circa  652]  a  great  and  frequent  controversy 
happened  about  the  observance  of  Easter;  those  that  came 
from  Kent  or  France  asserting  that  the  Scots  kept  Easter 
Sunday  contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  universal  Church. 
Among  them  was  a  most  zealous  defender  of  the  true  Easter, 
whose  name  was  Ronan,  a  Scot  by  nation,  but  instructed  in 
ecclesiastical  truth,  either  in  France  or  Italy,  who  disputed 


6o6     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

with  Finan/  and  convinced  many,  or  at  least  induced  them,  to 
make  a  stricter  inquiry  after  the  truth;  yet  he  could  not  pre- 
vail upon  Finan  .  .  .  James,  formerly  the  deacon  of  the  ven- 
erable archbishop  Paulinus  .  .  .  kept  the  true  and  Catholic 
Easter,  with  all  those  that  he  could  persuade  to  adopt  the 
right  way.  Queen  Eanfleda  [wife  of  Oswy,  king  of  North- 
umbria]  and  her  attendants  also  observed  the  same  as  she 
had  seen  practised  in  Kent,  having  with  her  a  Kentish  priest 
that  followed  the  Catholic  mode,  whose  name  was  Romanus. 
Thus  it  is  said  to  have  happened  in  those  times  that  Easter 
was  kept  twice  in  one  year;^  and  that  when  the  king, 
having  ended  the  time  of  fasting,  kept  his  Easter,  the  queen 
and  her  attendants  were  still  fasting  and  celebrating  Palm 
Sunday.  .  .  . 

After  the  death  of  Finan  [662]  .  .  .  when  Colman,  who  was 
also  sent  out  of  Scotland,  came  to  be  bishop,  a  great  contro- 
versy arose  about  the  observance  of  Easter,  and  the  rules  of 
ecclesiastical  life.  .  .  .  This  reached  the  ears  of  King  Oswy 
and  his  son  Alf rid ;  for  Oswy,  having  been  instructed  and  bap- 
tized by  the  Scots,  and  being  very  perfectly  skilled  in  their 
language,  thought  nothing  better  than  what  they  taught. 
But  Alfrid,  having  been  instructed  in  Christianity  by  Wilfrid, 
a  most  learned  man,  who  had  first  gone  to  Rome  to  learn  the 
ecclesiastical  doctrine,  and  spent  much  time  at  Lyons  with 
Dalfinus,  archbishop  of  France,  from  whom  he  had  received 
the  ecclesiastical  tonsure,  rightly  thought  this  man's  doctrine 
ought  to  be  preferred  to  all  the  traditions  of  the  Scots.  .  .  . 

The  controversy  having  been  started  concerning  Easter,  the 
tonsure,  and  other  ecclesiastical  matters,  it  was  agreed  that  a 
synod  should  be  held  in  the  monastery  of  Streaneshalch, 
which  signifies  the  bay  of  the  Hghthouse,  where  the  Abbess 
Hilda,  a  woman  devoted  to  God,  presided;  and  that  there  the 
controversy  should  be  decided.  The  kings,  both  father  and 
son,  came  hither.     Bishop  Colman,  with  his  Scottish  clerks, 

^Bishop  of  Lindisfarnc,  652-662. 

2  In  645,  647,  648,  651.     It  would  occur  again  in  665. 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    607 

and  Agilbert/  and  the  priests  Agatho  and  Wilfrid,  James  and 
Romanus  were  on  their  side.  But  the  Abbess  Hilda  and  her 
associates  were  for  the  Scots,  as  was  also  the  venerable  bishop 
Cedd,  long  before  ordained  by  the  Scots.  .  .  .  Then  Colman 
said:  ''  The  Easter  which  I  keep,  I  received  from  my  elders 
who  sent  me  hither  as  bishop;  all  our  fathers,  men  beloved  of 
God,  are  known  to  have  kept  it  in  the  same  manner;  and  that 
the  same  may  not  seem  to  any  to  be  contemptible  or  worthy 
of  being  rejected,  it  is  the  same  which  St.  John  the  Evangelist, 
the  disciple  especially  beloved  of  our  Lord,  with  all  the 
churches  over  which  he  presided,  is  recorded  as  having  ob- 
served. .  .  ." 
Wilfrid,  ha\ing  been  ordered  by  the  king  to  speak,  said: 
The  Easter  which  we  observe  we  saw  celebrated  by  all  at 
Rome,  where  the  blessed  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  lived, 
taught,  suffered,  and  were  buried;  we  saw  the  same  done  in 
Italy  and  France,  when  we  travelled  through  those  countries 
for  pilgrimage  and  prayer.  We  found  the  same  practised 
in  Africa,  Asia,  Egypt,  Greece,  and  in  all  the  world,  wherever 
the  Church  of  Christ  is  spread  abroad,  through  several  na- 
tions and  tongues,  at  one  and  the  same  time  .  .  .  except  only 
these  and  their  accomplices  in  obstinacy,  I  mean  the  Picts 
and  the  Britons,  who  foolishly,  in  these  two  remote  islands  of 
the  world,  and  only  in  part  of  them,  oppose  all  the  rest  of  the 
universe.  .  .  .  John,  pursuant  to  the  custom  of  the  law,  began 
the  celebration  of  the  feast  of  Easter  on  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  month,  in  the  evening,  not  regarding  whether  the  same 
happened  on  a  Saturday  or  any  other  day.  .  .  .  Thus  it  ap- 
pears that  you,  Colman,  neither  follow  the  example  of  John, 
as  you  imagine,  nor  that  of  Peter,  w^hose  traditions  you  know- 
ingly contradict.  .  .  .  For  John,  keeping  the  paschal  time 
according  to  the  decree  of  the  Mosaic  law,  had  no  regard  to 
the  first  day  after  the  Sabbath  [i.  e.,  that  it  should  fall  on 
Sunday],  and  you  who  celebrate  Easter  only  on  the  first  day 
after  the  Sabbath  do  not  practise  this.     Peter  kept  Easter 

^  Bishop  of  the  West  Saxons,  temporarily  in  Northumbria. 


6o8    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Sunday  between  the  fifteenth  and  the  twenty-first  day  of  the 
moon,  and  you  do  not  do  this,  but  keep  Easter  Sunday  from 
the  fourteenth  to  the  twentieth  day  of  the  moon,  so  that  you 
often  begin  Easter  on  the  thirteenth  moon  in  the  evening  .  .  . 
besides  this  in  your  celebration  of  Easter,  you  utterly  exclude 
the  twenty-first  day  of  the  moon,  which  the  law  ordered  to  be 
especially  observed." 

To  this  Colman  rejoined:  ''  Did  AnatoHus,  a  holy  man,  and 
much  commended  in  ecclesiastical  history,  act  contrary  to 
the  Law  and  the  Gospel  when  he  wrote  that  Easter  was  to 
be  celebrated  from  the  fourteenth  to  the  twentieth?  Is  it  to 
be  believed  that  our  most  reverend  Father  Columba  and  his 
successors,  men  beloved  of  God,  who  kept  Easter  after  the 
same  manner,  thought  or  acted  contrary  to  the  divine  writ- 
ings? Whereas  there  were  many  among  them  whose  sanctity 
was  attested  by  heavenly  signs  and  the  workings  of  miracles, 
whose  life,  customs,  discipline  I  never  cease  to  follow,  not 
questioning  that  they  are  saints  in  heaven." 

Wilfrid  said :  "  It  is  evident  that  Anatolius  was  a  most  holy 
and  learned  and  commendable  man;  but  what  have  you  to  do 
with  him,  since  you  do  not  observe  his  decrees?  For  he,  fol- 
lowing the  rule  of  truth  in  his  Easter,  appointed  a  cycle  of 
nineteen  years,  which  you  are  either  ignorant  of,  or  if  you 
know  yet  despise,  though  it  is  kept  by  the  whole  Church  of 
Christ.  .  .  .  Concerning  your  Father  Columba  and  his  fol- 
lowers. ...  I  do  not  deny  that  they  were  God's  servants, 
and  beloved  by  Him,  who,  with  rustic  simplicity  but  pious 
intentions,  have  themselves  loved  Him.  .  .  .  But  as  for  you 
and  your  companions,  you  certainly  sin,  if,  having  heard  the 
decrees  of  the  Apostolic  See,  or  rather  of  the  universal  Church, 
and  the  same  confirmed  by  Holy  Scripture,  you  refuse  to  fol- 
low them.  For  though  your  Fathers  were  holy,  do  you  think 
that  their  small  number  in  a  corner  of  the  remotest  island  is 
to  be  preferred  before  the  universal  Church  of  Christ  through- 
out the  world?  And  if  that  Columba  of  yours  (and,  I  may 
say,  ours  also,  if  he  was  Christ's  servant)  was  a  holy  man  and 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    609 

powerful  in  miracles,  yet  could  he  be  preferred  before  the 
most  blessed  prince  of  the  Apostles,  to  whom  our  Lord  said: 
'  Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church, 
and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it,  and  to  thee  I 
will  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven'?" 

When  Wilfrid  had  thus  spoken,  the  king  said:  '^  Is  it  true, 
Colman,  that  these  words  were  spoken  to  Peter  by  our  Lord?  " 
He  answered:  ^^  It  is  true,  O  king."  Then  he  said:  "  Can  you 
show  any  such  power  given  to  your  Columba?  "  Colman  an- 
swered: "  None."  Then  the  king  added:  "  Do  you  both  agree 
that  these  words  were  principally  directed  to  Peter,  and  that 
the  keys  of  heaven  were  given  to  him  by  our  Lord?  "  They 
both  answered:  ''We  do."  Then  the  king  concluded:  ''  And  I 
also  say  unto  you  that  he  is  the  doorkeeper  whom  I  will  not 
contradict,  but  will,  as  far  as  I  know  and  am  able  in  all  things, 
obey  his  decrees,  lest,  when  I  come  to  the  gates  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  there  should  be  one  to  open  them,  he  being 
my  adversary  who  is  proved  to  have  the  keys."  The  king 
having  said  this,  all  present,  both  small  and  great,  gave  their 
assent,  and  renounced  the  more  imperfect  institution,  and 
resolved  to  conform  to  that  w^hich  they  found  to  be  better 
.  .  .  [ch.  26].  Colman,  perceiving  that  his  doctrine  was 
rejected  and  his  sect  despised,  took  with  him  such  as  would 
not  comply  with  the  CathoHc  Easter  and  the  tonsure  (for 
there  was  much  controversy  about  that  also)  and  went  back 
to  Scotland  to  consult  with  his  people  what  was  to  be  done 
in  this  case.  Cedd,  forsaking  the  practices  of  the  Scots,  re- 
turned to  his  bishopric,  having  submitted  to  the  Catholic 
observance  of  Easter.  This  disputation  happened  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord's  incarnation,  664. 

(c)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  5.      (MSL,  95 :  180.) 

The  Council  of  Hertford  A.  D.  673.  The  organization  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  Church  by  Theodore. 

As  the  important  synod  of  Whitby  marks  the  beginning  of  con- 
formity of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church  under  the  leadership  of  the  king- 
dom of  Northumbria  to  the  customs  of  the  Roman  Church,  so  the 


6io    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

synod  of  Hertford  brings  the  internal  organization  of  the  Church  into 
conformity  with  the  diocesan  system  of  the  Continent  and  of  the  East, 
where  the  principles  of  the  general  councils  were  at  this  time  most  com- 
pletely enforced.  Theodore  of  Canterbury  was  a  learned  Greek  who 
was  sent  to  England  to  be  archbishop  of  Canterbury  by  Pope  Vitalian 
in  668.  The  Council  of  Hertford  was  the  first  council  of  all  the  Church 
among  the  Anglo-Saxons.  For  the  council,  see  also  Haddan  and 
Stubbs,  Councils  and  Ecclesiastical  Documents,  III,  1 18-122.  The  text 
given  is  that  of  Plummer. 

In  the  name  of  our  Lord  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
in  the  perpetual  reign  of  the  same  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  His 
government  of  His  Church.  It  seemed  good  that  we  should 
come  together  according  to  the  prescription  of  the  venerable 
canons,  to  treat  of  the  necessary  affairs  of  the  Church.  We  are 
met  together  on  this  24th  day  of  September,  the  first  indiction 
in  the  place  called  Hertford.  I,  Theodore,  although  un- 
worthy, appointed  by  the  Apostolic  See  bishop  of  the  church 
of  Canterbury,  and  our  fellow  priest  the  most  reverend  Bisi, 
bishop  of  the  East  Angles,  together  with  our  brother  and 
fellow  bishop  Wilfrid,  bishop  of  the  nation  of  the  Northum- 
brians, present  by  his  proper  legates,  as  also  our  brethren 
and  fellow  bishops,  Putta,  bishop  of  the  Castle  of  the  Kentish- 
men  called  Rochester,  Leutherius,  bishop  of  the  West  Saxons, 
and  Winfrid,  bishop  of  the  province  of  the  Mercians,  were 
present.  When  we  were  assembled  and  had  taken  our  places, 
each  according  to  his  rank,  I  said:  I  beseech  you,  beloved 
brethren,  for  the  fear  and  love  of  our  Redeemer,  that  we  all 
labor  in  common  for  our  faith,  that  whatsoever  has  been 
decreed  and  determined  by  the  holy  and  approved  Fathers 
may  be  perfectly  followed  by  us  all.  I  enlarged  upon  these 
and  many  other  things  tending  unto  charity  and  the  preser- 
vation of  the  unity  of  the  Church.  And  when  I  had  finished 
my  speech  I  asked  them  singly  and  in  order  whether  they 
consented  to  observe  all  things  which  had  been  canonically 
decreed  by  the  Fathers?  To  which  all  our  fellow  priests 
answered:  We  are  all  well  agreed  readily  and  most  cheerfully 
to  keep  whatever  the  canons  of  the  holy  Fathers  have  pre- 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    6ii 

scribed.  Whereupon  I  immediately  produced  the  book  of 
canons/  and  pointed  out  ten  chapters  from  the  same  book, 
which  I  had  marked,  because  I  knew  that  they  were  especially 
necessary  for  us,  and  proposed  that  they  should  be  dihgently 
observed  by  all,  namely : 

Ch.  I.  That  we  shall  jointly  observe  Easter  day  on  the 
Lord's  day  after  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  moon  in  the  first 
month. 

Ch.  2.  That  no  bishop  invade  the  diocese  of  another,  but 
be  content  with  the  government  of  the  people  committed  to 
him. 

Ch.  3.  That  no  bishop  be  allowed  to  trouble  in  any  way 
any  monasteries  consecrated  to  God,  nor  to  take  away  by 
violence  anything  that  belongs  to  them. 

Ch.  4.  That  the  monks  themselves  go  not  from  place  to 
place;  that  is,  from  one  monastery  to  another,  without  let- 
ters dismissory  of  their  own  abbot  ;^  but  that  they  shall  con- 
tinue in  that  obedience  which  they  promised  at  the  time  of 
their  conversion. 

Ch.  5.  That  no  clerk,  leaving  his  own  bishop,  go  up  and 
down  at  his  own  pleasure,  nor  be  received  wherever  he  comes, 
without  commendatory  letters  from  his  bishop;  but  if  he  be 
once  received  and  refuse  to  return  when  he  is  desired  so  to 
do,  both  the  receiver  and  the  received  shall  be  laid  under  an 
excommunication. 

Ch.  6.  That  stranger  bishops  and  clerks  be  content  with 
the  hospitaHty  that  is  freely  offered  them;  and  none  of  them 
be  allowed  to  exercise  any  sacerdotal  function  without  per- 
mission of  the  bishop  in  whose  diocese  he  is  known  to  be. 

Ch.  7.  That  a  synod  be  assembled  twice  in  the  year.  But, 
because  many  occasions  may  hinder  this,  it  was  jointly  agreed 
by  all  that  once  in  the  year  it  be  assembled  on  the  first  of 
August  in  the  place  called  Clovesho. 

^  Coming  from  Rome  under  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was  sent,  this  book 
of  the  canons  can  be  no  other  than  the  collection  of  Dionysius  Exiguus. 
-  See  below,  §  105. 


6i2    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Ch.  8.  That  no  bishop  ambitiously  put  himself  before 
another,  but  that  every  one  observe  the  time  and  order  of  his 
consecration. 

Ch.  9.  The  ninth  chapter  was  discussed  together:  That 
the  number  of  bishops  be  increased  as  the  number  of  the 
faithful  grew;  ^  but  we  did  nothing  as  to  this  point  at 
present. 

Ch.  10.  As  to  marriages:  That  none  shall  be  allowed  to 
any  but  what  is  a  lawful  marriage.  Let  none  commit  incest. 
Let  none  relinquish  his  own  wife  but  for  fornication,  as  the 
holy  Gospel  teaches.  But  if  any  have  dismissed  a  wife  united 
to  him  in  lawful  marriage,  let  him  not  be  joined  to  another  if 
he  wish  really  to  be  a  Christian,  but  remain  as  he  is  or  be 
reconciled  to  his  own  wife. 

After  we  had  jointly  treated  on  and  discussed  these  chap- 
ters, that  no  scandalous  contention  should  arise  henceforth 
by  any  of  us,  and  that  there  be  no  changes  in  the  publication 
of  them,  it  seemed  proper  that  every  one  should  confirm  by 
the  subscription  of  his  own  hand  whatever  had  been  deter- 
mined. I  dictated  this  our  definitive  sentence  to  be  written 
by  Titillus,  the  notary.  Done  in  the  month  and  indiction 
above  noted.  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  attempt  in  any  way 
to  oppose  or  infringe  this  sentence,  confirmed  by  our  present 
consent,  and  the  subscription  of  our  hands  as  agreeable  to  the 
decrees  of  the  canons,  let  him  know  that  he  is  deprived  of 
every  sacerdotal  function  and  our  society.  May  the  divine 
grace  preserve  us  safe  living  in  the  unity  of  the  Church. 

(d)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  17.     (MSL,  95  :  198.) 

Council  of  Hatfield,  A.  D.  680. 

At  the  Council  of  Hatfield  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church  formally  recog- 
nized the  binding  authority  of  the  five  general  councils  already  held, 
and  rejected  Monotheletism  in  accord  with  the  Roman  synod  A.  D. 
649.  It  seems  to  have  been,  as  stated  in  the  introduction  to  the  Acts 
of  the  council,  a  preventive  measure.  In  Plummer's  edition  of  Bede 
this  chapter  is  numbered  15. 

^  Cf.  Bede,  Epistula  ad  Eghertum  Episcopum;   Plummer,  op.  cU.,  I,  412/. 


FOUNDATION  OF  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH    613 

At  this  time  Theodore,  hearing  that  the  faith  of  the  Church 
of  Constantinople  had  been  much  disturbed  by  the  heresy  of 
Eutyches/  and  being  desirous  that  the  churches  of  the  EngHsh 
over  which  he  ruled  should  be  free  from  such  a  stain,  having 
collected  an  assembly  of  venerable  priests  and  very  many 
doctors,  diligently  inquired  what  beHef  they  each  held,  and 
found  unanimous  agreement  of  all  in  the  Catholic  faith;  and 
this  he  took  care  to  commit  to  a  synodical  letter  for  the  in- 
struction and  remembrance  of  posterity.  This  is  the  beginning 
of  the  letter: 

In  the  name  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  in  the 
reign  of  our  most  pious  lords,  Egfrid,  king  of  the  Humbrians, 
in  the  tenth  year  of  his  reign,  on  the  fifteenth  day  before  the 
Kalends  of  October  [September  17]  in  the  eighth  indiction,  and 
Ethelred,  king  of  the  Mercians,  in  the  sixth  year  of  his  reign; 
and  Adwulf,  king  of  the  Kentishmen,  in  the  seventh  year  of 
his  reign;  Theodore  being  president,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
archbishop  of  the  island  of  Britain  and  of  the  city  of  Canter- 
bury, and  other  venerable  men  sitting  with  him,  bishops  of 
the  island  of  Britain,  with  the  holy  Gospels  laid  before  them, 
and  in  the  place  which  is  called  by  the  Saxon  name  of  Hatfield, 
we,  handhng  the  subject  in  concert,  have  made  an  exposition 
of  the  right  and  orthodox  faith,  as  our  incarnate  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  delivered  it  to  His  disciples,  who  saw  Him  present 
and  heard  His  discourses,  and  as  the  creed  of  the  holy  Fathers 
has  dehvered  it,  and  all  the  holy  and  universal  synods  and  all 
the  chorus  of  approved  doctors  of  the  CathoHc  Church  teach. 
We  therefore  piously  and  orthodoxly  following  them  and, 
making  our  profession  according  to  their  divinely  inspired 
teaching,  believe  in  unison  with  it,  and  confess  according  to 
the  holy  Fathers  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  are  properly  and  truly  a  consubstantial  Trinity  in 
unity,  and  unity  in  Trinity;  that  is,  in  one  God  in  three  con- 
substantial  subsistencies  or  persons  of  equal  glory  and  honor. 

^  The  Monothelete  doctrine,  which  appeared  to  be  a  form  of  Eutychianism 
because  of  its  close  connection  with  Monophysitism,  v.  infra,  §  io8. 


6i4    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

And  after  many  things  of  this  kind  that  pertained  to  the 
confession  of  the  right  faith,  the  holy  synod  also  adds  these 
things  to  its  letter: 

We  have  received  as  holy  and  universal  five  synods  of  the 
blessed  Fathers  acceptable  to  God ;  that  is,  of  the  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  assembled  at  Nicasa  against  the  most  im- 
pious Arius  and  his  tenets;  and  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
at  Constantinople  against  the  madness  of  Macedonius  and 
Eudoxius  and  their  tenets;  and  of  the  two  hundred  in  the 
first  Council  of  Ephesus  against  the  most  wicked  Nestorius 
and  his  tenets;  and  of  the  six  hundred  and  thirty  at  Chalcedon 
against  Eutyches  and  Nestorius  and  their  tenets;  and  again 
of  those  assembled  in  a  fifth  council  at  Constantinople  [A.  D. 
553],  in  the  time  of  the  younger  Justinian,  against  Theodore 
and  the  epistles  of  Theodoret  and  Ibas  and  their  tenets  against 
Cyril. 

And  a  Httle  after:  Also  we  have  received  the  synod ^  that 
was  held  in  the  city  of  Rome  in  the  time  of  the  blessed  Pope 
Martin  in  the  eighth  indiction,  in  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign 
of  the  most  pious  Constantine.^  And  we  glorify  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  as  they  glorified  Him,  neither  adding  nor  sub- 
tracting anything;  and  we  anathematize  with  heart  and 
mouth  those  whom  they  anathematized ;  and  those  whom  they 
received  we  receive,  glorifying  God  the  Father  without  begin- 
ning, and  his  only  begotten  Son,  begotten  of  the  Father  before 
the  world  began,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeding  ineffably 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  as  those  holy  Apostles,  prophets, 
and  doctors  have  declared  whom  we  have  mentioned  above. 
And  we  all  who  with  Theodore  have  made  an  exposition  of 
the  Catholic  faith  have  subscribed  hereto. 

^  A.  D.  649,  Against  the  Monotheletes,  see  Hefele,  §  307;  v.  infra,  §  108; 
see  Hahn,  §  181,  for  the  Anathematism  of  the  Council;  Haddan  and  Stubbs, 
op.  cit.,  Ill,  145-151. 

2  Constans  II,  also  known  as  Constantine  IV;  see  DCB. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  INSTITUTIONS  615 

CHAPTER    III.     THE    FOUNDATION   OF    THE    ECCLESIAS- 
TICAL   INSTITUTIONS    OF    THE    MIDDLE    AGES 

In  the  period  between  the  conversion  of  the  Franks  and  the 
rise  of  the  dynasty  of  Charles  Martel,  or  the  period  compris- 
ing the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries,  the  foundation  was  laid 
for  those  ecclesiastical  institutions  which  are  peculiar  to  the 
Middle  Ages,  and  found  in  the  mediaeval  Church  their  full 
embodiment.  In  the  Church  the  Latin  element  was  still  more 
or  less  dominant,  and  society  was  only  slowly  transformed 
by  the  Germanic  elements.  In  the  adjustment  of  Roman  in- 
stitutions to  the  new  political  conditions  in  which  Germanic 
factors  were  dominant,  the  Germanic  and  the  Roman  ele- 
ments are  accordingly  found  in  constantly  varying  propor- 
tions. In  the  case  of  the  diocesan  and  parochial  organiza- 
tion, only  very  slowly  could  the  Church  in  the  West  attain 
that  complete  organization  which  had  long  since  been  estab- 
lished in  the  East,  and  here  Roman  ideas  were  profoundly 
modified  by  Germanic  legal  principles  (§  loi).  But  at  the 
same  time  the  Church's  body  of  teaching  and  methods  of 
moral  training  were  made  clearly  intelligible  and  more  appli- 
cable to  the  new  conditions  of  Christian  Kfe.  The  teaching  of 
Augustine  was  received  only  in  part  at  the  Council  of  Orange, 
A.  D.  529  {v.  supra,  §  85),  and  it  was  profoundly  modified  by 
the  moralistic  type  of  theology  traceable  to  Tertullian  and 
even  further  back  (v.  supra,  §  39).  It  was,  furthermore,  com- 
pleted by  a  clearer  and  more  precise  statement  of  the  doc- 
trines of  purgatory  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  and  to  the 
death  of  Christ  was  applied  unequivocally  the  doctrine  of 
merit  which  had  been  developed  in  the  West  in  connection 
with  the  early  penitential  discipline,  and  which  was  seen  to 
throw  a  new  light  upon  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  upon  the  cross. 
These  conceptions  served  as  a  foundation  for  new  discussions, 
and  confirmed  tendencies  already  present  in  the  Church 
(§  102).  Connected  with  this  theology  was  the  penitential 
discipline,  which,  growing  out  of   the  ancient  discipline  as 


6i6    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

modified  by  the  earlier  form  of  monastic  life,  especially  in 
Ireland,  came  under  the  influence  of  the  Germanic  legal  con- 
ceptions (§  103).  In  the  same  period  monasticism  was  or- 
ganized upon  a  new  rule  by  Benedict  of  Nursia  (§  104),  and 
the  need  of  provision  for  the  education  of  the  young  and  for 
the  training  of  the  clergy  was  felt  and,  to  some  extent,  pro- 
vided for  by  monastery  schools  and  other  methods  of  educa- 
tion (§  105). 

§  loi.     The  Foundation  of  the  Mediaeval  Diocesan  and 

Parochial  Constitution. 
§  102.     Western  Piety  and  Thought  in  the  Period  of  the 

Conversion  of  the  Barbarians. 
§  103.     Foundation  of  the  Mediaeval  Penitential  System. 
§  104.     The  New  Monasticism  and  the  Rule  of  Benedict 

of  Nursia. 
§  105.     Foundation  of  Mediaeval  Culture  and  Schools. 

§  loi.    Foundation    of    the    Medieval    Diocesan    and 
Parochial  Constitution 

An  outHne  of  some  of  the  legislation  is  here  given,  whereby 
the  parish  as  organized  in  the  West  was  built  up,  and  the  dio- 
cese was  made  to  consist  of  a  number  of  parishes  under  the 
bishop,  who,  however,  did  not  exercise  an  absolute  control 
over  the  incomes  and  position  of  the  priests  under  him. 

The  selections  are  given  in  chronological  order. 

(a)  Council  of  Agde,  A.  D.  506,  Canons.     Bruns,  II,  145. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  important  councils  of  the  period.  Its  various 
canons  have  all  been  embodied  in  the  Canon  Law;  for  the  references  to 
the  Decretum  of  Gratian,  in  which  they  appear,  see  Hefele,  §  222.  It  is 
to  be  noted  that  it  was  held  under  Alarich,  the  Arian  king  of  the  Vis- 
igoths.    The  preface  is,  therefore,  given  as  being  significant. 

Since  this  holy  synod  has  been  assembled  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  and  with  the  permission  of  our  most  glorious,  mag- 
nificent, and  most  pious  king  in  the  city  of  Agde,  there,  with 
knees  bent  and  on  the  ground,  we  have  prayed  for  his  king- 


DIOCESAN  AND  PAROCHIAL  CONSTITUTION    617 

dom,  his  long  life,  for  the  people,  that  the  lord  who  has  given 
us  permission  to  assemble,  may  happily  extend  his  kingdom, 
that  he  may  govern  justly  and  protect  valiantly;  we  have 
assembled  in  the  basilica  of  St.  Andrew  to  treat  of  the  disci- 
pline and  the  ordination  of  pontiffs  and  other  things  of  utihty 
to  the  Church. 

Canon  21.  If  any  one  wishes  to  have  an  oratory  in  the 
fields  outside  of  the  parishes,  in  which  the  gathering  of  the 
people  is  lawful  and  appointed,  we  permit  him  to  have  a  mass 
there  with  the  proper  license  on  the  other  festivals,  on  account 
of  the  weariness  of  the  family  [i.  e.,  in  going  to  the  distant 
parish  church],  but  on  Easter,  Christmas,  Epiphany,  Ascen- 
sion Day,  Pentecost  and  the  Nativity  of  St.  John  the  Baptist, 
or  if  there  are  any  other  very  high  festival  days  observed,  let 
them  hold  no  masses  except  in  the  cities  and  parishes.  But 
if  the  clergy,  without  the  command  or  permission  of  the 
bishop,  hold  and  perform  the  masses  on  the  festivals  above 
mentioned  in  the  oratories,  let  them  be  driven  from  the  com- 
munion. 

Canon  30.  Because  it  is  appropriate  that  the  service  of 
the  Church  be  observed  in  the  same  way  by  all,  it  is  to  be 
desired  that  it  be  done  so  everywhere.  After  the  antiphones 
the  collects  shall  be  said  in  order  by  the  bishops  and  presby- 
ters, and  the  hymns  of  Matins  and  Vespers  be  sung  daily; 
and  at  the  conclusion  of  the  mass  of  Matins  and  Vespers,^ 
after  the  hymns  a  chapter  of  the  Psalms  shall  be  read,  and  the 
people  who  are  gathered  shall,  after  the  prayer,  be  dismissed 
with  a  benediction  of  the  bishop  until  Vespers. 

Canon  38.  Without  letters  commendatory  of  their  bishops, 
it  is  not  permitted  to  the  clergy  to  travel.  The  same  rule  is  to 
be  observed  in  the  case  of  monks.  If  reproof  of  words  does 
not  correct  them,  we  decree  that  they  shall  be  beaten  with 
rods.     It  is  also  to  be  observed  in  the  case  of  monks  that  it 

^  MatitiUinarum  vel  vespertinarum  missariim.  The  term  "mass"  is  here 
applied,  not  to  the  eucharist,  but  to  Matins  and  Vespers.  See  Hefele,  §  222, 
on  this  canon. 


6i8     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

is  not  permitted  them  to  leave  the  community  for  solitary 
cells,  unless  the  more  severe  rule  is  remitted  by  their  abbot 
to  them  who  have  been  approved  in  the  hermit  life,  or  on 
account  of  the  necessity  of  infirmity;  but  only  then  let  it  be 
done  so  that  they  remain  within  the  walls  of  the  same  monas- 
tery, and  they  are  permitted  to  have  separate  cells  under  the 
authority  of  the  abbots.  It  is  not  permitted  abbots  to  have 
different  cells  or  many  monasteries,  or  except  on  account  of  the 
inroads  of  enemies  to  erect  dwellings  within  walls. 

(b)  I  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  511,  Canons.    Bruns,  II,  160. 

Canon  15.  Concerning  those  things  which  in  the  form  of 
lands,  vineyards,  slaves,  and  other  property  the  faithful  have 
given  to  the  parishes,  the  statutes  of  the  ancient  canons  are 
to  be  observed,  so  that  all  things  shall  be  in  the  control  of 
the  bishop;  but  of  those  things  which  are  given  at  the  altar, 
a  third  is  to  be  faithfully  given  to  the  bishop. 

Canon  17.  All  churches  which  in  various  places  have  been 
built  and  are  daily  being  built  shall,  according  to  the  law  of 
the  primitive  canons,  be  in  the  control  of  the  bishop  in  whose 
territory  they  are  located. 

(c)  IV  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  541,  Canons.    Bruns,  II, 

208. 

Canon  7.  In  oratories  on  landed  estates,  the  lords  of  the 
property  shall  not  install  wandering  clergy  against  the  will 
of  the  bishop  to  whom  the  rights  of  that  territory  belong, 
unless,  perchance,  they  have  been  approved,  and  the  bishop 
has  in  his  discretion  appointed  them  to  serve  in  that  place. 

Canon  26.  If  any  parishes  are  estabHshed  in  the  houses  of 
the  mighty,  and  the  clergy  who  serve  there  have  been  admon- 
ished by  the  archdeacon  of  the  city,  according  to  the  duty 
of  his  office,  and  they  neglect  to  do  what  they  ought  to  do  for 
the  Church,  because  under  the  protection  of  the  lord  of  the 
house,  let  them  be  corrected  according  to  the  ecclesiastical 
discipline;    and  if  by  the  agents  of  these  lords,  or  by  these 


DIOCESAN  AND  PAROCHIAL  CONSTITUTION    619 

lords  themselves  of  the  place,  they  are  prevented  from  doing 
any  part  of  their  duty  toward  the  Church,  those  who  do  this 
iniquity  are  to  be  deprived  of  the  sacred  rites  until,  having 
made  amends,  they  are  received  back  into  the  peace  of  the 
Church.^ 

Canon  33.  If  any  one  has,  or  asks  to  have,  on  his  land  a 
diocese  [i.  e.,  parish],  let  him  first  assign  to  it  sufficient  lands 
and  clergy  who  may  there  perform  their  duties,  that  suitable 
reverence  be  done  to  the  sacred  places. 

(d)  V  Council  of  Orleans,  A.  D.  549,  Canons.    Bruns,  II, 

208. 

At  this  council  no  less  than  seven  archbishops,  forty-three  bishops 
and  representatives  of  twenty-one  other  bishops  were  present.  It  was, 
therefore,  a  general  council  of  the  Frankish  Church,  although  polit- 
ically the  Frankish  territory  was  divided  into  three  kingdoms  held 
respectively  by  Childebert,  Chlothar,  and  Theudebald.  Orleans  it- 
self was  in  the  dominion  of  Childebert.  Cf.  preface  to  the  canons  of 
II  Orleans,  A.  D.  533,  which  states  that  that  council  was  attended  by 
five  archbishops  and  the  deputy  of  a  sixth,  as  well  as  by  bishops  from 
all  parts  of  Gaul,  and  was  called  at  the  command  of  the  "Glorious 
kings,"  i.  e.,  Childebert,  Chlothar,  and  Theudebert. 

Canon  13.  It  is  permitted  to  no  one  to  retain,  alienate,  or 
take  away  goods  or  property  which  has  been  lawfully  given 
to  a  church,  monastery,  or  orphan  asylums  for  any  charity; 
that  if  any  one  does  do  so  he  shall,  according  to  the  ancient 
canons  [cf.  Hefele,  §§  220,  222],  be  regarded  as  a  slayer  of  the 
poor,  and  shall  be  shut  out  from  the  thresholds  of  the  Church 
so  long  as  those  things  are  not  restored  which  have  been  taken 
away  or  retained. 

(e)  Council  of  Braga,  A.  D.  572,  Canons.    Bruns,  II,  37. 

Canon  5.  As  often  as  bishops  are  requested  by  any  of  the 
faithful  to  consecrate  churches,  they  shall  not,  as  having  a 
claim,  ask  any  payment  of  the  founders;  but  if  he  wishes  to 
give  him  something  from  a  vow  he  has  made,  let  it  not  be  de- 

^  Cf.  canon  4,  Council  of  Clermont,  A.  D.  535  (Bruns,  II,  188):  "The  clergy 
are  not  in  any  way  to  be  set  against  their  bishops  by  the  secular  potentates, " 


620    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

spised;  but  if  poverty  or  necessity  prevent  him,  let  nothing 
be  demanded  of  him.  This  only  let  each  bishop  remember, 
that  he  shall  not  dedicate  a  church  or  basilica  before  he  shall 
have  received  the  endowment  of  the  basiUca  and  its  service 
confirmed  by  an  instrument  of  donation;  for  it  is  a  not  Hght 
rashness  for  a  church  to  be  consecrated,  as  if  it  were  a  private 
dwelHng,  without  Hghts  and  without  the  support  of  those  who 
are  to  serve  there. 

Canon  6.  In  case  of  any  one  who  builds  a  basilica,  not 
from  any  faithful  devotion,  but  from  the  desire  of  gain,  that 
whatsoever  is  there  gathered  of  the  offerings  of  the  people  he 
may  share  half  and  half  with  the  clergy,  on  the  ground  that 
he  has  built  the  basilica  on  his  own  land,  which  in  various 
places  is  said  to  be  done  quite  constantly,  this  therefore  ought 
hereafter  to  be  observed,  that  no  bishop  consent  to  such 
an  abominable  purpose,  that  he  should  dare  to  consecrate  a 
basiHca  which  is  founded  not  as  the  heritage  of  the  saints  but 
rather  under  the  condition  of  tribute. 

(/)  II  Council  of  Toledo,  A.  D.  589,  Canons.    Bruns,  I,  217. 

Canon  19.  Many  who  have  built  churches  demand  that 
these  churches,  contrary  to  the  canons,  shall  be  consecrated 
in  such  a  way  that  they  shall  not  allow  the  endowment,  which 
they  have  given  the  church,  to  belong  to  the  control  of  the 
bishop;  when  this  has  been  done  in  the  past,  let  this  be  void, 
and  in  the  future  forbidden;  but  let  all  things  pertain  to  the 
power  and  control  of  the  bishop  according  to  the  ancient  law. 

§  102.    Western  Piety  and  Thought  in  the  Period  of 
THE  Conversion  of  the  Barbarians 

In  the  century  following  Augustine,  the  dogmatic  interest 
of  the  Church  was  chiefly  absorbed  in  the  Christological  con- 
troversies in  the  East.  There  were,  however,  some  discussions 
in  the  West  arising  from  the  manifest  difficulty  of  reconciling 
the  doctrine  of  predestination,  as  drawn  from  Augustine,  with 


WESTERN  PIETY  AND  THOUGHT  621 

the  efficacy  of  baptism.  For  the  adjustment  of  the  teaching 
of  Augustine  to  the  sacramental  system  of  the  Church  and  to 
baptism  more  particularly,  see  the  Council  of  Orange,  A.  D. 
529,  of  which  the  principal  conclusions  are  given  above  (§  85). 
In  the  sixth  century  and  in  the  early  part  of  the  seventh,  doc- 
trines were  clearly  enunciated  which  had  been  abundantly 
foreshadowed  by  earlier  writers,  but  had  not  been  fitted  into 
an  intelligible  and  practical  system.  These  were  especially 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory  and  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass.  The 
doctrine  of  purgatory  completed  the  penitential  system  of  the 
early  Church  by  making  it  possible  to  expiate  sin  by  suffering 
in  a  future  existence,  in  the  case  of  those  who  had  died  with- 
out completely  doing  penance  here.  By  the  sacrifice  of  the 
mass  the  advantages  of  Christ's  death  were  constantly  ap- 
plied, not  merely  to  the  sin  of  the  world  in  general,  but  to 
specified  objects;  the  behever  was  brought  into  closest  con- 
tact with  the  great  act  of  redemption,  and  a  centre  was  placed 
around  which  the  life  of  the  individual  and  the  authority  of 
the  hierarchy  could  be  brought  into  relation. 
Additional  source  material:  The  works  of  Gregory  the  Great,  PNF. 

{a)  Caesarius  of  Aries,  Sermon  104.  (MSL,  39  :  1947, 
1949.) 

Caesarius  presided  at  the  Council  of  Orange  A.  D.  529.  He  died 
in  543.  Not  a  few  of  his  sermons  have  been  mixed  up  with  those  of 
Augustine,  and  this  sermon  is  to  be  found  in  Appendix  to  the  works  of 
Augustine  in  the  standard  editions  of  that  Father.  It  should  be  noted 
that  this  conception  of  purgatory  is  not  wholly  unlike  that  of  St. 
Augustine;  see  his  Enchiridion,  chs.  69,  109  {v.  supra,  §  84);  also  De 
Civ.  Dei,  20:  25;  21  :  13. 

Ch.  4.  By  continual  prayers  and  frequent  fasts  and  more 
generous  alms,  and  especially  by  forgiveness  of  those  who  sin 
against  us,  we  diligently  redeem  our  sins,  lest  by  chance  when 
collected  together  against  us  at  once  they  make  a  great  mass 
and  overwhelm  us.  Whatsoever  of  these  sins  shall  not  have 
been  redeemed  by  us  is  to  be  purged  by  that  fire  concerning 
which  the  Apostle  said:    ''  Because  it  will  be  revealed  by  fire, 


622     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

and  if  any  man's  work  is  burned  he  will  suffer  loss"  (I  Cor. 
3:15).  If  in  tribulation  we  do  not  give  thanks  to  God,  if 
by  good  works  we  do  not  redeem  our  sins,  we  will  remain  so 
long  in  that  fire  of  purification^  until  the  little,  trifling  sins, 
as  hay,  wood,  and  stubble  are  consumed. 

Ch.  8.  All  saints  who  serve  God  truly  strive  to  give  them- 
selves to  reading  and  prayer,  and  to  perseverance  in  good 
works,  and  building  no  mortal  sins  and  no  little  sins,  that  is, 
wood,  hay,  and  stubble,  upon  the  foundation  of  Christ;  but 
good  works,  that  is,  gold,  silver,  and  precious  stones,  will  with- 
out injury  go  through  that  fire  of  which  the  Apostle  spoke: 
*' Because  it  will  be  revealed  by  fire."  But  those  who,  although 
they  do  not  commit  capital  sins,  yet  are  prone  to  commit  very 
little  sins  and  are  negligent  in  redeeming  them,  will  attain 
to  eternal  life  because  they  believed  in  Christ,  but  first  either 
in  this  life  they  are  purified  by  bitter  tribulation,  or  certainly 
in  that  fire  of  which  the  Apostle  speaks  they  are  to  be  tor- 
mented, that  they  may  come  to  eternal  life  without  spot  or 
wrinkle.  But  those  who  have  committed  homicide,  sacrilege, 
adultery,  and  other  similar  sins,  if  there  does  not  come  to  their 
aid  suitable  penitence,  will  not  deserve  to  go  through  that 
fire  of  purification  to  life,  but  they  will  be  thrown  into  death 
by  eternal  fire. 

(b)  Gregory  the  Great,  Dialogorum  lihri  IV,  de  Vita  et 
Miraculis  Patrum  Italicorum,  IV,  56.     (MPL,  77  :  425.) 

The  sacrifice  of  the  mass. 

See  also  the  selection  below  on  the  doctrine  of  purgatory. 

It  should  be  considered  that  it  is  safer  to  do  to  men,  while 
one  is  living,  the  good  which  one  hopes  will  be  done  by  others 
after  one's  death.  It  is  more  blessed  to  depart  free  than  to 
seek  liberty  after  chains.  We  ought,  with  our  whole  mind, 
despise  the  present  world,  especially  since  we  see  it  already 

^  The  employment  of  the  technical  term  purgatorium  to  designate  the  place 
and  fires  of  purification  is  very  much  later,  and  not  defined  until  the  thirteenth 
century  as  the  official  and  technical  word,  although  used  long  before  that  time 
in  theological  discussion. 


WESTERN  PIETY  AND  THOUGHT  623 

passing  away.  We  ought  to  immolate  to  God  the  daily  sac- 
rifice of  our  tears,  the  daily  offerings  of  His  flesh  and  blood. 
For  this  offering  pecuHarly  preserves  the  soul  from  eternal 
death,  and  it  renews  to  us  in  a  mystery  the  death  of  the  Only 
begotten,  who,  although  being  risen  from  the  dead,  dieth  no 
more,  and  death  hath  no  more  dominion  over  Him  (Rom.  6:9); 
yet,  while  in  Himself  He  liveth  immortal  and  incorruptible, 
for  us  He  is  immolated  again  in  this  mystery  of  the  sacred 
oblation.  For  it  is  His  body  that  is  there  given,  His  flesh 
that  is  divided  for  the  salvation  of  the  people,  His  blood  that 
is  poured,  no  longer  into  the  hands  of  unbelievers,  but  into  the 
mouths  of  the  faithful.  For  this  let  us  ever  estimate  what 
this  sacrifice  is  for  us,  which  for  our  absolution  ever  imitates 
the  passion  of  the  only  begotten  Son.  For  what  one  of  the 
faithful  can  have  any  doubt  that  at  the  very  hour  of  the  offer- 
ing [immolatio],  at  the  word  of  the  priest,  the  heavens  are 
opened,  the  choirs  of  angels  are  present  at  the  mystery  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  lowest  things  are  united  to  the  highest, 
earthly  things  with  heavenly,  and  from  the  invisible  and  the 
visible  there  is  made  one  ? 

(c)  Gregory  the  Great,  Dialog.,  IV,  39.     (MSL,  77:  393.) 

The  doctrine  of  purgatory. 

Gregory  hardly  adds  anything  to  Augustine  more  than  a  clearer 
definition  after  the  lines  laid  down  by  Caesarius  of  Aries. 

From  these  sayings  [John  12:35;  II  Cor.  6:2;  Eccles.  9:10] 
it  is  evident  that  as  one  left  the  earth  so  one  will  appear 
before  the  judgment.  Yet  still  it  is  to  be  believed  that  for 
certain  sUght  sins  there  is  to  be  before  that  judgment  a  fire 
of  purification,  because  the  Truth  says  that,  if  one  utters  blas- 
phemy against  the  Holy  Ghost,  his  sin  will  be  forgiven  him 
neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the  future  [Matt.  12  :  31].  From 
this  saying  one  is  given  to  understand  that  some  sins  can  be 
forgiven  in  this  life,  others  in  a  future  life. 

(d)  Gregory  the  Great,  In  Evangelia,  II,  37,  8.  (MSL, 
76  :  1279.) 


624    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

The  application  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  to  persons  in  purgatory. 

Not  long  before  our  time  the  case  is  told  of  a  certain  man  who, 
having  been  taken  captive,  was  carried  far  away  [cf.  Dialog., 
IV,  57],  and  because  he  was  held  a  long  time  in  chains  his 
wife,  since  she  had  not  received  him  back  from  that  captivity, 
believed  him  to  be  dead  and  every  week  she  had  the  sacrifice 
offered  for  him  as  already  dead.  And  as  often  as  the  sacrifice 
was  offered  by  his  spouse  for  the  absolution  of  his  soul,  the 
chains  were  loosed  in  his  captivity.  For  having  returned  a 
long  time  after,  greatly  astonished  he  told  his  wife  that  on 
certain  days  each  week  his  chains  were  loosed.  His  wife 
considered  the  days  and  hours,  and  then  knew  that  he  was 
loosed  when,  as  she  remembered,  the  sacrifice  was  offered  for 
him.  From  that  perceive,  my  dearest  brothers,  to  what  ex- 
tent the  holy  sacrifice  offered  by  us  is  able  to  loose  the  bonds 
of  the  heart,  if  the  sacrifice  offered  by  one  for  another  can 
loose  the  chains  of  the  body. 

§  103.    The  Foundation  of  the  Medieval  Penitential 

System 

The  penitential  system,  as  it  was  organized  in  the  Western 
Church  in  the  sixth,  seventh,  and  eighth  centuries,  was  but 
the  carrying  out  of  principles  which  had  appeared  elsewhere  in 
Christendom  and  were  involved  in  the  primitive  method  of 
dealing  with  moral  delinquents  by  the  authorities  of  the 
Church.  [See  the  epistles  of  Basil  the  Great  to  Amphilochius 
(Ep.  189,  199,  217)  in  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  VIIL]  Similar  prob- 
lems had  to  be  handled  everywhere  whenever  the  Church 
came  to  deal  with  moral  conduct,  and  much  the  same  solution 
was  found  everywhere.  There  is,  however,  no  known  connec- 
tion between  the  earliest  penitentials  of  the  Western  Church, 
those  of  Ireland,  and  the  similar  books  of  the  East.  There 
is  no  need  of  supposing  that  there  was  a  connection.  But 
in  the  case  of  the  works  attributed  to  Theodore  of  Tarsus, 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  himself  a  Greek  and  probably  a 


FOUNDATION  OF  PENITENTIAL  SYSTEM    625 

native  of  Tarsus,  there  is  a  provable  connection  which  is 
evident  to  any  one  reading  his  work,  as  he  refers  to  Basil  and 
others.  The  characteristics  of  the  Western  penitentials  are 
their  minute  division  of  sins,  their  exact  determination  of 
penances  for  each  sin,  and  the  great  extent  to  which  they 
were  used  in  the  practical  work  of  the  Church.  They  serve 
as  the  first  crude  beginnings  of  a  moral  theology  of  a  practical 
character,  such  as  would  be  needed  by  the  poorly  trained 
parish  clergy  of  the  times  in  dealing  with  their  flocks.  On 
account  of  the  nature  of  these  works,  it  is  hardly  necessary 
or  expedient  to  give  more  than  a  few  brief  extracts  in  addition 
to  references  to  sources.  Much  of  the  matter  is  extremely 
offensive  to  modern  taste. 

{a)  King  ^Ethelberht,  Laws.  Thorpe,  Ancient  Laws  and 
Institutes  (Rolls  Series),  if. 

The  Eady  Germanic  Codes  are  full  of  regulations  whereby  for  an 
injury  the  aggrieved  party,  or  his  family  in  case  of  his  death,  could  be 
prevented  from  retaliating  in  kind  upon  the  aggressor  and  his  family. 
This  was  effected  by  a  money  payment  as  compensation  for  damages 
sustained,  and  the  amount  for  each  sort  of  injury  was  carefully  regu- 
lated by  law,  i.  e.,  by  ancient  custom,  which  was  reduced  to  writing 
in  the  sixth  century  in  some  cases.  The  Laws  of  Mthelherht  are  writ- 
ten in  Anglo-Saxon  and  are  probably  the  earliest  in  a  Teutonic  lan- 
guage. For  a  translation  of  characteristic  portions  of  the  Salic  Law, 
which  should  be  compared  with  the  Laws  of  Mthelherht  to  show  the 
universality  of  the  same  system,  see  Henderson,  Select  Historical  Doc- 
uments of  the  Middle  Ages,  p.  176,  London,  1892;  also  Hodgkin,  Italy 
and  Her  Invaders,  VI,  183,  for  the  Lombard  law  of  Rothari,  a  little 
later,  but  of  the  same  spirit. 

21.  If  any  man  slay  another,  let  him  make  bot  with  a  half 
leod-geld  of  100  shillings. 

22.  If  any  man  slay  another  at  an  open  grave,  let  him  pay 
20  shillings  and  pay  the  whole  leod  within  40  days. 

23.  If  a  stranger  retire  from  the  land,  let  his  kindred  pay 
a  half  leod. 

24.  If  any  one  bind  a  freeman,  let  him  make  bot  with  20 
shillings. 


626    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

25.  If  any  one  slay  a  ceorl's  hlaf-aeta/  let  him  make  bot 
with  5  shillings. 

38.  If  a  shoulder  be  lamed,^  let  bot  be  made  with  12  shil- 
lings. 

39.  If  the  ear  be  struck  off,  let  bot  be  made  with  12  shil- 
lings. 

40.  If  the  other  ear  hear  not,  let  bot  be  made  with  25  shil- 
Hngs. 

41.  If  an  eye  be  struck  out,  let  bot  be  made  with  50  shil- 
Kngs. 

51.  For  each  of  the  four  front  teeth,  6  shillings;  for  the 
tooth  that  stands  next  to  them,  4  shillings;  for  that  which 
stands  next  to  that,  3  shillings,  and  then  afterward  i  shilling. 

(b)  Vinnian,  Penitential.  Wasserschleben,  Die  Bussord- 
nungen  der  ahendldndischen  Kirche,  108  ff. 

This  is  one  of  the  eadiest  of  the  penitentials  and  belongs  to  the  Irish 
Church. 

1.  If  one  has  committed  in  his  heart  a  sin  of  thought  and 
immediately  repents  of  it,  let  him  smite  his  breast  and  pray 
God  for  forgiveness  and  perform  satisfaction  because  he  has 
sinned. 

2.  If  he  has  often  thought  of  the  sins  and  thinks  of  com- 
mitting them,  and  is  then  victor  over  the  thought  or  is  over- 
come by  it,  let  him  pray  God  and  fast  day  and  night  until 
the  wicked  thought  disappears  and  he  is  sound  again. 

3.  If  he  has  thought  on  a  sin  and  determines  to  commit  it, 
but  is  prevented  in  the  execution,  so  is  the  sin  the  same,  but 
not  the  penance.^ 

6.  If  a  cleric  has  planned  in  his  heart  to  smite  or  kill  his 
neighbor,  he  shall  do  penance  half  a  year  on  bread  and  water 
according  to  the  prescribed  amount,  and  for  a  whole  year 

^  Member  of  household,  a  servant.  ^j^  case  of  assault  and  battery, 

3  The  preceding  rules  are  clearly  matter  of  moral  direction,  and  indicate  the 

transition  from  general  advice  to  a  scale  of  sins  and  punishments,  such  as 

follows. 


FOUNDATION  OF  PENITENTIAL  SYSTEM    627 

abstain  from  wine  and  the  eating  of  meat,  and  then  may  he 
be  permitted  again  to  approach  the  altar. 

7.  If  it  is  a  layman,  he  shall  do  penance  for  a  whole  week; 
for  he  is  a  man  of  this  world  and  his  guilt  is  lighter  in  this 
world  and  his  punishment  in  the  future  is  less. 

8.  If  a  cleric  has  smitten  his  brother  [i.  e.,  a  clergyman]  or 
his  neighbor  and  drawn  blood  ...  he  shall  do  penance  a 
whole  year  on  bread  and  water;  he  may  not  fill  any  clerical 
office,  but  must  with  tears  pray  to  God  for  himself. 

9.  Is  he  a  layman,  he  shall  do  penance  for  40  days,  and 
according  to  the  judgment  of  the  priest  or  some  other  right- 
eous man  pay  a  determined  sum  of  money. 

(c)  Theodore  of  Tarsus,  Penitential,  1.  Haddan  and  Stubbs, 
111,73/- 

For  Theodore  of  Tarsus,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  see  W.  Stubbs, 
art.  "Theodorus  of  Tarsus"  in  DCB,  That  he  wrote  a  penitential  is 
not  certain.  But  that  he  was  regarded  as  the  author  of  a  penitential  is 
clear  enough.  In  fact,  his  name  is  attached  to  penitentials  in  much  the 
same  way  as  David's  name  is  attached  to  the  whole  book  of  Psalms. 
For  a  discussion  of  the  various  works  attributed  to  Theodore,  see  Had- 
dan and  Stubbs,  Councils  and  Ecclesiastical  Documents,  loc.  cit.  This  is 
a  characteristic  penitential  and  may  be  regarded  as  following  closely 
the  decisions  and  opinions  of  Theodore.  Much  of  it  is  unprintable  in 
English. 

Cap.  I.  On  drunkenness,  i.  If  any  bishop  or  other  per- 
son ordained  is  customarily  given  to  the  vice  of  drunkenness, 
let  him  cease  from  it  or  be  deposed. 

2.  If  a  monk  vomit  from  drunkenness,  let  him  do  30  days, 
penance. 

3.  If  a  presbyter  or  deacon  do  the  same,  let  him  do  40 
days'  penance. 

4.  If  any  one  by  infirmity  or  because  he  has  abstained  for 
a  long  time,  and  it  is  not  his  habit  to  drink  or  eat  much,  or 
for  joy  at  Christmas  or  at  Easter,  or  for  the  commemoration 
of  any  of  the  saints,  does  this,  and  he  has  not  taken  more  than 
is  decreed  by  the  elders,  he  has  done  no  wrong.     If  the  bishop 


628    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

should  have  commanded,  he  does  no  harm  to  him  unless  he 
himself  does  likewise. 

5.  If  a  believing  layman  vomits  from  drunkenness,  let 
him  do  15  days'  penance. 

6.  He  who  becomes  drunk  against  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord,  if  he  has  a  vow  of  hoKness  let  him  do  penance  7 
days  on  bread  and  water,  and  70  days  without  fat;  the  laity 
without  beer. 

7.  Whoever  out  of  rhahce  makes  another  drunk,  let  him 
do  penance  40  days. 

8.  Whoever  vomits  from  satiety  let  him  do  penance  3 
days. 

9.  If  with  the  sacrifice  of  the  communion,  let  him  do  pen- 
ance 7  days;  but  if  out  of  infirmity,  he  is  without  guilt. 

Cap.  II.     On  fornication. 
Cap.  III.     On  theft. 

Cap.  IV.  On  the  killing  of  men.  [This  should  be  com- 
pared with  the  secular  laws.] 

1.  If  any  one  out  of  vengeance  for  a  relative  kill  a  man, 
let  him  do  penance  as  for  homicide  7  or  10  years.  If,  how- 
ever, he  is  willing  to  return  to  relatives  the  money  of  valua- 
tion [Weregeld,  according  to  the  secular  rating],  the  penance 
will  be  lighter,  that  is  by  one-half  the  length. 

2.  He  who  kills  a  man  for  vengeance  for  his  brother,  let 
him  do  penance  3  years;  in  another  place  he  is  said  to  do 
penance  10  years. 

3.  But  homicides  10  or  7  years. 

4.  If  a  layman  kills  another  man  with  thoughts  of  hatred, 
if  he  does  not  wish  to  relinquish  his  arms,  let  him  do  penance 
7  years,  without  flesh  and  wine  3  years. 

5.  If  any  one  kills  a  monk  or  a  clergyman,  let  him  relin- 
quish his  arms  and  serve  God^  or  do  7  years'  penance.  He 
is  in  the  judgment  of  the  bishop.  But  he  who  kills  a  bishop 
or  a  presbyter,  the  judgment  concerning  him  is  in  the  king. 

6.  He  who  by  the  command  of  his  lord  kills  a  man,  let 

^I.  e.,  in  a  monastery. 


FOUNDATION  OF  PENITENTIAL  SYSTEM    629 

him  keep  away  from  the  church  40  days;  and  he  who  kills  a 
man  in  a  public  war,  let  him  do  penance  40  days. 

7.  If  out  of  wrath,  3  years;  if  by  chance,  i  year;  if  by 
drink  or  any  contrivance,  4  years  or  more;  if  by  strife,  let 
him  do  penance  10  years. - 

Cap.  V.     Concerning  those  who  are  deceived  by  a  heresy. 

Cap.  VI.     Concerning  perjury. 

Cap.  VII.  Concerning  many  and  various  wrong  acts  and 
those  necessary  things  which  are  not  harmful. 

Cap.  VIII.  Concerning  various  failings  of  the  servants  of 
God. 

Cap.  IX.  Concerning  those  who  are  degraded  or  cannot  he 
ordained. 

Cap.  X.  Concerning  those  who  are  haptived  twice,  how  they 
shall  do  penance. 

Cap.  XL  Concerjiing  those  who  violate  the  Lord^s  Day  and 
the  appointed  fasts  of  the  Church. 

Cap.  XII.  Concerning  the  commmiion  of  the  eucharist  or 
the  sacrifice. 

Cap.  XIII.     Concerning  reconciliation. 

Cap.  XIV.  Especially  concerning  the  penance  of  those  who 
marry. 

Cap.  XV.     Concerning  the  worship  of  idols. 

{d)  Bede,  Penitential,  ch.  XL  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  Coun- 
cils and  Ecclesiastical  Documents,  III,  32. 

The  Penitential  of  Bede  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  Liber  de 
Remediis  Peccatorum  attributed  to  him,  cf.  Haddan  and  Stubbs,  op.  ciL, 
who  print  the  genuine  penitential.  It  belongs  to  the  period  before 
725.  In  not  a  few  points  it  closely  resembles  that  of  Theodore.  The 
concluding  passage  here  given  is  to  be  found  in  many  penitentials 
with  but  little  variation.  It  is  probably  as  early  as  the  work  itself, 
although  apparently  not  by  Bede.  It  is  a  method  of  commuting  pen- 
ances. In  place  of  fasting  inordinate  or  impossible  lengths  of  time, 
other  penances  could  be  substituted.  In  later  ages  still  other  forms  of 
commutation  were  introduced.  Even  money  payments  were  used  as 
commutation  of  penance. 

^  Another  reading,  4. 


630    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

XL     On  Counsel  to  he  Given. 

We  read  in  the  penitential  of  doing  penance  on  bread  and 
water,  for  the  great  sins  one  year  or  two  or  three  years,  and 
for  little  sins  a  month  or  a  week.  Likewise  in  the  case  of 
some  the  conditions  are  harsh  and  difHcult.  Therefore  to  him 
who  cannot  do  these  things  we  give  the  counsel  that  psalms, 
prayers,  and  almsgiving  ought  to  be  performed  some  days  in 
penance  for  these ;  that  is,  that  psalms  are  for  one  day  when  he 
ought  to  do  penance  on  bread  and  water.  Therefore  he  should 
sing  fifty  psalms  on  his  knees,  and  if  not  on  his  knees  seventy 
psalms  inside  the  church  or  in  one  place.  For  a  week  on  bread 
and  water,  let  him  sing  on  his  knees  three  hundred  psalms  in 
order  and  in  the  church  or  in  one  place.  And  for  one  month 
on  bread  and  water,  one  thousand  five  hundred  psalms  kneel- 
ing, or  if  not  kneeling  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  twenty, 
and  afterward  let  him  fast  every  day  until  the  sixth  hour  and 
abstain  from  flesh  and  wine;  but  whatsoever  other  food  God 
has  given  him  let  him  eat,  after  he  has  sung  the  psalms. 
And  he  who  does  not  know  psalms  ought  to  do  penance  and 
to  fast,  and  every  day  let  him  give  to  the  poor  the  value  of  a 
denarius,  and  fast  one  day  until  the  ninth  hour,  and  the  next 
until  vespers,  and  after  that  whatsoever  he  has  let  him  eat. 

§  104.    The  New  Monasticism  and  the  Rule  of  Bene- 
dict OF  NURSIA 

In  the  first  centuries  of  monasticism  in  the  West,  the  great- 
est variety  was  to  be  found  among  the  constitutions  of  the 
various  monastic  houses  and  the  rules  drawn  up  by  great 
leaders  in  the  ascetic  movement.  This  variety  extended  even 
to  the  nature  of  the  vows  assumed  and  their  obligation.  Ben- 
edict of  Nursia  (circa  480  to  circa  544),  gave  the  rule  according 
to  which  for  some  centuries  nearly  all  the  monasteries  of  the 
West  were  ultimately  organized.  The  first  great  example  of 
this  rule  in  operation  was  Benedict's  own  monastery  at  Monte 
Cassino.     For  a  time  the  rule  of  Benedict  came  into  conflict 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  631 

with  that  of  Columbanus  in  Gaul.^  But  the  powerful  recom- 
mendation of  Gregory  the  Great,  who  had  introduced  it  in 
Rome,  and  the  intrinsic  superiority  of  the  rule  itself  made  the 
Benedictine  system  triumphant.  It  should  be  noted  that  the 
Benedictine  cloisters  were  for  centuries  independent  estab- 
lishments and  only  formed  into  organized  groups  of  monas- 
teries in  the  great  monastic  reforms  of  the  tenth  and  follow- 
ing centuries.  It  is  a  question  how  far  the  Benedictine  rule 
was  introduced  into  England  in  the  early  centuries  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  Church,  although  it  is  often  taken  for  granted 
that  it  was  introduced  by  Augustine.  Critical  edition  of  the 
Benedictine  rule  by  Wolfiflin,  Leipsic,  1895;  in  Migne's  edi- 
tion there  is  an  elaborate  commentary  with  many  illustrative 
extracts  and  formulae,  as  well  as  traditional  glosses. 

Additional  source  material:  An  abbreviated  translation  of  the 
Benedictine  rule  may  be  found  in  Henderson,  Select  Historical  Docu- 
ments, 1892,  and  in  full  in  Thatcher  and  McNeal,  A  Source  Book  joy 
Mediceval  History,  1905. 

{A)     Benedict  of  Nursia,  Regula.     (MSL,  66  :  246.) 

I.  Concerning  the  kinds  of  monks  and  their  modes  of  liv- 
ing. It  is  manifest  that  there  are  four  kinds  of  monks.  The 
first  is  that  of  the  cenobites,  that  is  the  monastic,  serving 
under  a  rule  and  an  abbot.  The  second  kind  is  that  of  the 
anchorites,  that  is  the  hermits,  those  who  have  learned  to 
fight  against  the  devil,  not  by  the  new  fervor  of  conversion, 
but  by  a  long  probation  in  a  monastery,  having  been  taught 
already  by  association  with  many;  and  having  been  well 
prepared  in  the  army  of  the  brethren  for  the  soHtary  fight 
of  the  hermit,  and  secure  now  without  the  encouragement  of 
another,  they  are  able,  God  helping  them,  to  fight  with  their 
own  hand  or  arm  against  the  vices  of  the  flesh  or  of  their 
thoughts.  But  a  third  and  very  bad  kind  of  monks  are  the 
sarabites,  not  tried  as  gold  in  the  furnace  by  a  rule,  experience 
being  their  teacher,  but  softened  after  the  manner  of  lead; 

^For  the  rule  of  ColumbanuSj  see  MSL,  80:  209  _^. 


632     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

keeping  faith  with  the  world  by  their  works,  they  are  known 
by  their  tonsure  to  lie  to  God.  Being  shut  up  by  twos  and 
threes  alone  and  without  a  shepherd,  in  their  own  and  not  in 
the  Lord's  sheepfold,  they  have  their  own  desires  for  a  law. 
For  whatever  they  think  good  and  choose,  that  they  deem 
holy;  and  what  they  do  not  wish,  that  they  consider  unlawful. 
But  the  fourth  kind  of  monk  is  the  kind  called  the  gyrovagi, 
who  during  their  whole  life  are  guests  for  three  or  four  days 
at  a  time  in  the  cells  of  different  monasteries  throughout  the 
various  provinces;  they  are  always  wandering  and  never 
stationary,  serving  their  own  pleasures  and  the  allurements  of 
the  palate,  and  in  every  way  worse  than  the  sarabites.  Con- 
cerning the  most  wretched  way  of  all,  it  is  better  to  keep 
silence  than  to  speak.  These  things,  therefore,  being  omitted, 
let  us  proceed  with  the  aid  of  God  to  treat  of  the  best  kind, 
the  cenobites. 

2.  What  the  abbot  should  be  like.  An  abbot  who  is  worthy 
to  preside  over  a  monastery  ought  always  to  remember  what 
he  is  called  and  to  carry  out  in  his  deeds  the  name  of  a  supe- 
rior. For  in  the  monastery  he  is  believed  to  be  Christ's  repre- 
sentative, since  he  is  called  by  His  name,  the  Apostle  saying: 
"  We  have  received  the  spirit  of  adoption  of  sons,  whereby  we 
cry  Abba,  Father"  [Rom.  8  :  15].  And  so  the  abbot  ought 
not  (and  oh  that  he  may  not !)  teach  or  decree  or  order  any- 
thing apart  from  the  precepts  of  the  Lord;  but  his  order  or 
teaching  should  be  sprinkled  with  the  leaven  of  divine  jus- 
tice in  the  minds  of  his  disciples.  .  .  .  No  distinctions  of 
persons  shall  be  made  by  him  in  the  monastery.  One  shall 
not  be  loved  by  him  more  than  another,  unless  the  one 
whom  he  finds  excelling  in  good  work  and  obedience.  A  free- 
born  man  shall  not  be  preferred  to  one  coming  from  servitude, 
unless  there  be  some  reasonable  cause.  But  when  it  is  just 
and  it  seems  good  to  the  abbot  he  shall  show  preference  no 
matter  what  the  rank  shall  be.  But  otherwise  they  shall 
keep  their  own  places;  for,  whether  we  be  bound  or  free,  we 
are  all  one  in  Christ,  and  under  God  we  perform  an  equal 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  633 

service  of   subjection;    for  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons 
[Acts  10  :  34].  .  .  . 

3.  Concerning  calling  the  brethren  to  take  counsel.  As  often  as 
anything  unusual  is  to  be  done  in  the  monastery,  let  the  abbot 
call  together  the  whole  congregation  and  himself  explain  the 
question  before  them.  And  having  heard  the  advice  of  the 
brethren,  he  shall  consider  it  by  himself,  and  let  him  do  what 
he  judges  most  advantageous.  And  for  this  reason,  more- 
over, we  have  said  that  all  ought  to  be  called  to  take  counsel; 
because  it  is  often  to  a  younger  person  that  the  Lord  reveals 
what  is  best.  The  brethren,  moreover,  ought,  with  all  humble 
subjection,  to  give  their  advice  so  that  they  do  not  too  boldly 
presume  to  defend  what  seems  good  to  them,  but  it  should 
rather  depend  upon  the  judgment  of  the  abbot;  so  that,  what- 
ever he  decides  upon  as  the  more  salutary,  they  should  all 
agree  to  it.  .  .  . 

4.  Concerning  the  instruments  of  good  works. 

5.  Concerning  obedience.  The  first  grade  of  humihty  is 
prompt  obedience.  This  becomes  those  who,  on  account  of 
the  holy  service  which  they  professed,  or  on  account  of  the 
fear  of  hell  or  the  glory  of  eternal  Hfe,  consider  nothing  dearer 
to  them  than  Christ;  so  that  as  soon  as  anything  is  commanded 
by  their  superior,  they  may  not  know  how  to  suffer  delay  in 
doing  it,  even  as  if  it  were  a  divine  command.  .  .  . 

6.  Concerning  silence.  7.  Concerning  humility.  8.  Con- 
cerning the  Divine  Offices  at  night.  9.  How  many  Psalms  are 
to  be  said  at  night.  10.  How  in  summer  the  Nocturnal  Praises 
shall  be  carried  on.  1 1 .  How  Vigils  shall  be  conducted  on  Sun- 
day. 12.  Concerning  the  order  of  Matins  on  Sunday.  13. 
Concerning  the  order  of  Matins  on  week  days.  14.  Concerning 
the  order  of  Vigils  on  Saints'  days.  15.  Concerning  the  occa- 
sions when  the  Alleluias  shall  be  said.  16.  Concerning  the  order 
of  Divine  Worship  during  the  day.  ly.  On  the  number  of 
Psalms  to  be  said  at  these  times.  18.  Concerning  the  order  in 
which  the  Psalms  are  to  be  said.  19.  Concerning  the  art  of  sing- 
ing.    20.  Concerning   the   reroerence   in   prayer.     21.  Concern- 


634    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

ing  the  Deans  of  monasteries.  22.  How  monks  shall  sleep.  21. 
Concerning  excommunication  for  faults.  24.  What  ought  to  he 
the  measure  of  excommunication.  25.  Concerning  graver  faults. 
26.  Concerning  those  who  without  being  ordered  by  the  Abbot, 
associate  with  the  excommunicated.  27.  What  care  the  Abbot 
should  exercise  with  regard  to  the  excommunicated.  28.  Con- 
cerning those  who,  being  often  rebuked,  do  not  amend.  29. 
Whether  brothers  who  leave  the  monastery  ought  to  be  received 
back.  30.  Concerning  boys  under  age,  how  they  should  be  cor- 
rected. 31.  Concerning  the  Cellarer  of  the  monastery,  what  sort 
of  person  he  should  be.  32.  Concerning  the  utensils  or  prop- 
erty of  the  monastery. 

33.  Whether  monks  should  have  anything  of  their  own.  More 
than  anything  else  is  this  special  vice  to  be  cut  off  root  and 
branch  from  the  monastery,  that  one  should  presume  to  give 
or  receive  anything  without  order  from  the  abbot,  or  should 
have  anything  of  his  own;  he  should  have  absolutely  nothing, 
neither  a  book  nor  tablets  nor  a  pen,  nothing  at  all — for  indeed 
it  is  not  allowed  to  have  their  own  bodies  or  wills  in  their  own 
power.  But  all  things  necessary  they  must  receive  from  the 
father  of  the  monastery;  nor  is  it  allowable  to  have  anything 
which  the  abbot  has  not  given  or  permitted.  .  .  . 

34.  Whether  all  ought  to  receive  necessaries  equally.  2>S- Con- 
cerning the  weekly  officers  of  the  kitchen.  36.  Concerning  in- 
firm brothers.  37.  (Mitigation  of  the  rule  for  the  very  old 
and  the  very  young.)     38.  Concerning  the  weekly  reader. 

39.  Concerning  the  amount  of  food.  We  believe,  more- 
over, that  for  the  daily  refection  of  the  sixth  and  for  that  of 
the  ninth  hour  as  well  two  cooked  dishes,  on  account  of  the 
infirmities  of  the  different  ones,  are  enough  in  all  months  for 
all  tables;  so  that  whoever,  perchance,  cannot  eat  of  one  may 
partake  of  the  other.  Therefore  let  two  cooked  dishes  suffice 
for  all  the  brethren;  and  if  it  is  possible  to  obtain  apples  or 
fresh  vegetables,  a  third  may  be  added.  One  full  pound  of 
bread  shall  suffice  for  a  day,  whether  there  be  one  refection  or 
breakfast  and  supper.     But  if  they  are  to  have  supper,  the 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  635 

third  part  of  that  same  pound  shall  be  reserved  by  the  cellarer 
to  be  given  back  to  those  when  they  are  about  to  sup.  But  if 
perchance  some  greater  labor  shall  have  been  performed,  it 
shall  be  in  the  will  and  power  of  the  abbot,  if  it  is  expedient, 
to  increase  anything.  .  .  .  But  to  younger  boys  the  same 
quantity  shall  not  be  served,  but  less  than  to  the  older  ones, 
as  moderation  is  to  be  observed  in  all  things.  But  every  one 
shall  abstain  altogether  from  eating  the  flesh  of  four-footed 
beasts  except  alone  in  the  case  of  the  weak  and  the  sick. 

40.  Concerning  the  amount  of  drink.  Each  one  has  his 
own  gift  from  God,  one  in  this  way  and  another  in  that. 
Therefore  it  is  with  some  hesitation  that  the  amount  of  daily 
sustenance  for  others  is  fixed  by  us.  Nevertheless,  consider- 
ing the  weakness  of  the  infirm,  we  believe  that  a  half  pint  of 
wine  a  day  is  enough  for  each  one.  Those,  moreover,  to  whom 
God  has  given  the  ability  of  enduring  abstinence  should  know 
that  they  will  have  their  own  reward.  But  the  prior  shall 
judge  if  either  the  needs  of  the  place,  or  labor,  or  heat  of  the 
summer  require  more;  considering,  in  all  things,  lest  satiety  or 
drunkenness  creep  in.  Indeed,  we  read  that  wine  is  not 
suitable  for  monks  at  all.  But,  because  in  our  times  it  is  not 
possible  to  persuade  monks  of  this,  let  us  agree  at  least  as  to 
the  fact  that  we  should  not  drink  until  we  are  sated,  but  spar- 
ingly. For  wine  can  make  even  the  wise  to  go  astray.  Where, 
moreover,  the  limitations  of  the  place  are  such  that  the  amount 
written  above  cannot  be  found,  but  much  less  or  nothing  at 
all,  those  who  five  there  shall  bless  God  and  shall  not  murmur. 
And  we  admonish  them  as  to  this,  above  all,  that  they  be 
without  murmuring. 

41.  At  what  hours  the  brethren  ought  to  take  their  refection. 
42.  That  after  Compline  no  one  shall  speak.  43.  Concerning 
those  who  come  late  to  Divine  Service  or  to  table.  44.  Concern- 
ing those  who  are  excommunicated  and  how  they  shall  render 
satisfaction.  45.  Concerning  those  who  make  mistakes  in  the 
oratory.  46.  Concerning  those  who  err  in  other  matters.  47. 
Concerning  the  announcement  of  the  hour  of  Divine  Service. 


636     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

48.  Concerning  the  daily  manual  labor.  Idleness  is  the 
enemy  of  the  soul.  Therefore  at  fixed  times  the  brethren 
ought  to  be  occupied  in  manual  labor;  and  again  at  fixed 
times  in  sacred  reading.  Therefore  we  believe  that  according 
to  this  disposition  both  seasons  ought  to  be  so  arranged 
that,  from  Easter  imtil  the  first  of  October,  going  out  early 
from  the  first  until  about  the  fourth  hour,  they  shall  labor  at 
what  might  be  necessary.  Moreover,  from  the  fourth  until 
about  the  sixth  hour,  they  shall  give  themselves  to  reading. 
After  the  sixth  hour,  moreover,  rising  from  table,  they  shall 
rest  in  their  beds  with  all  silence;  or  perchance  he  that  wishes 
to  read  may  so  read  to  himself  that  he  shall  not  disturb  an- 
other. And  nones  shall  be  said  rather  early,  about  the  middle 
of  the  eighth  hour;  and  again  they  shall  work  at  what  is 
necessary  until  vespers.  But  if  the  exigency  or  the  poverty 
of  the  place  demands  that  they  shall  be  occupied  by  them- 
selves in  picking  fruits,  they  shall  not  be  cast  down;  for 
then  they  are  truly  monks  if  they  live  by  the  labor  of  their 
hands,  as  did  also  our  Fathers  and  the  Apostles. 

From  the  first  of  October  until  the  beginning  of  Lent,  they 
shall  give  themselves  unto  reading  until  the  second  full  hour. 
At  the  second  hour  tierce  shall  be  said,  and  all  shall  labor  at 
the  task  which  is  enjoined  upon  them  until  the  ninth.  When 
the  first  signal  of  the  ninth  hour  shall  have  been  given  they 
shall  each  leave  off  his  work  and  be  ready  when  the  second  sig- 
nal strikes.  Moreover,  after  the  refection  they  shall  give 
themselves  to  their  reading  or  to  the  Psalms. 

And  in  the  days  of  Lent,  from  dawn  until  the  third  full 
hour,  they  shall  give  themselves  to  their  reading;  and  until 
the  tenth  hour  they  shall  do  the  labor  that  is  enjoined  upon 
them.  In  the  days  of  Lent  they  shall  all  receive  separate 
books  from  the  library,  which  they  shall  read  through  com- 
pletely in  order;  these  books  shall  be  given  out  on  the  first 
day  of  Lent.  Above  all,  there  shall  certainly  be  appointed 
one  or  two  elders  to  go  around  the  monastery  at  the  hours  in 
which  the  brethren  are  engaged  in  reading  and  see  to  it  that 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  637 

no  troublesome  brother  is  to  be  found  who  is  given  to  idle- 
ness and  chatting  and  is  not  intent  upon  his  reading  and  is 
not  only  of  no  use  to  himself  but  disturbing  the  others.  If 
such  an  one  (and  may  there  not  be  such!)  be  found,  he  shall 
be  admonished  once  and  a  second  time.  If  he  does  not  amend, 
he  shall  be  subject  under  the  rule  to  such  punishment  that 
others  may  fear.  Nor  shall  the  brethren  assemble  at  unsuit- 
able hours. 

On  Sundays  all  shall  give  themselves  to  reading  except 
those  who  are  deputed  to  various  duties.  But  if  any  one  be 
so  negligent  and  lazy  that  he  will  not  or  cannot  meditate  or 
read,  some  task  shall  be  imposed  upon  him  which  he  can  per- 
form, so  that  he  be  not  idle.  On  feeble  and  delicate  brothers 
such  a  labor  or  art  is  to  be  imposed  that  they  shall  neither  be 
idle  nor  so  oppressed  by  the  burden  of  labor  as  to  be  driven  to 
take  to  flight.  Their  weakness  is  to  be  taken  into  considera- 
tion by  the  abbot. 

49.  The  observance  of  Lent.  50.  Concerning  brothers  who 
labor  far  from  the  oratory  or  are  on  a  journey.  51.  Concerning 
brothers  who  do  not  journey  very  Jar.  52.  Concerning  the  ora- 
tory of  the  monastery.  53.  Concerning  the  reception  of  guests. 
54.  As  to  whether  a  monk  should  be  allowed  to  receive  letters  or 
anything.  55.  Concerning  the  Vestiarius  and  Calciarius.  56. 
Concerning  the  table  of  the  Abbot.  57.  Concerning  the  artificers 
of  the  monastery. 

58.  Concerning  the  manner  of  receiving  brethren.  When 
any  one  newly  comes  for  conversion  of  life,  an  easy  entrance 
shall  not  be  granted  hinij  but  as  the  Apostle  says:  ''  Try  the 
spirits  whether  they  be  of  God"  [I  John  4:1].  Therefore  if 
one  who  comes  perseveres  in  knocking,  and  is  seen  after  four 
or  five  days  to  endure  patiently  the  insults  heaped  upon  him 
and  the  difficulty  of  ingress  and  to  persist  in  his  request,  let 
entrance  be  granted  him,  and  let  him  be  lor  a  few  days  in  the 
guest  cell.  After  this  let  him  be  in  the  cell  of  the  novices, 
where  he  shall  meditate  and  eat  and  sleep.  And  an  elder 
shall  be  appointed  for  him  such  as  shall  be  capable  of  winning 


638     DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

souls,  who  shall  altogether  intently  watch  him,  and  be  zealous 
to  see  if  he  in  truth  seek  God,  if  he  be  zealous  for  the  work  of 
God,  for  obedience,  for  suffering  shame.  And  above  all  the 
harshness  and  roughness  of  the  means  through  which  one  ap- 
proaches God  shall  be  told  him  in  advance.  If  he  promise 
perseverance  in  his  steadfastness  after  the  lapse  of  two  months, 
this  Rule  shall  be  read  over  to  him  in  order,  and  it  shall  be  said 
to  him:  Behold  the  law  under  which  thou  didst  wish  to  serve; 
if  thou  canst  observe  it,  enter;  but  if  thou  canst  not,  depart 
freely.  If  he  shall  have  stood  firm  thus  far,  then  he  shall  be 
led  into  the  aforesaid  cell  of  the  novices,  and  again  he  shall  be 
proven  with  all  patience. 

And  after  the  lapse  of  six  months,  the  Rule  shall  be  reread  to 
him,  that  he  may  know  upon  what  he  is  entering.  And 
if  he  persist  thus  far,  after  four  months  the  same  Rule  shall  still 
again  be  read  to  him.  If,  after  deliberating  with  himself,  he 
shall  promise  that  he  will  observe  all  things  and  to  obey  all  the 
commands  laid  upon  him,  then  he  shall  be  received  into  the 
congregation,  knowing  that  it  is  decreed  that  by  the  law  of 
the  Rule  he  shall  from  that  day  not  be  allowed  to  depart  from 
the  monastery,  nor  to  shake  free  from  his  neck  the  yoke  of  the 
Rule,  which  after  such  painful  dehberation  he  was  at  liberty 
to  refuse  or  receive. 

He  who  is  to  be  received  shall  make  in  the  oratory,  in  the 
presence  of  all,  a  promise  before  God  and  His  saints  concerning 
his  stability  [stahilitas  loci]  and  the  change  in  the  manner  of 
his  life  [conversio  morum]  and  obedience  [obedientia],^  so 
that  if  at  any  time  he  act  contrary  he  shall  know  that  he 
shall  be  condemned  by  Him  whom  he  mocks.  And  concerning 
this,  his  promise,  he  shall  make  a  petition  addressed  by  name  to 
the  saints  whose  reHcs  are  there,  and  to  the  abbot  who  is 
present.  And  this  petition  he  shall  write  out  with  his  own 
hand;  or,  if  he  be  really  unlearned  in  letters,  let  another  at 
his  request  write  it,  and  to  that  the  novice  shall  make  his  sign. 
With  his  own  hand  he  shall  place  it  upon  the  altar.     And  when 

^This  with  the  two  preceding  are  the  three  vows  of  the  Benedictine  monk. 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  639 

he  has  placed  it  there,  the  novice  shall  immediately  begin 
this  verse:  ''  Receive  me  O  Lord  according  to  Thy  promise 
and  I  shall  live;  and  cast  me  not  down  from  my  hope  " 
[Psalm  119  :  116,  Vulgate  version].  And  this  verse  the  whole 
congregation  shall  repeat  three  times  adding:  Glory  be  to  the 
Father,  etc.  Then  that  brother  novice  shall  prostrate  himself 
at  the  feet  of  each  one  that  they  may  pray  for  him.  And 
already  from  that  day  he  shall  be  considered  as  in  the  congre- 
gation. 

If  he  have  any  property,  he  shall  first  either  present  it  to  the 
poor  or,  making  a  solemn  donation,  shall  confer  it  on  the  mon- 
astery, receiving  nothing  at  all  for  himself;  and  he  shall  know 
for  a  fact  that  from  that  day  he  shall  have  no  power  even  over 
his  own  body.  Immediately  thereafter,  in  the  monastery,  he 
shall  take  off  his  own  garments  in  which  he  was  clad,  and  shall 
put  on  the  garments  of  the  monastery.  Those  garments,  fur- 
thermore, which  he  has  taken  off  shall  be  placed  in  the  ves- 
tiary to  be  preserved;  so  that  if,  at  any  time,  on  the  devil's 
persuasion,  he  shall  wish  to  go  forth  from  the  monastery  (and 
may  it  never  happen)  then,  taking  off  the  garments  of  the 
monastery  let  him  be  cast  out.  But  the  petition  he  made  and 
which  the  abbot  took  from  upon  the  altar,  he  shall  not  re- 
ceive again,  but  it  shall  be  preserved  in  the  monastery. 

59.  Concerning  the  sons  of  nobles  and  poor  men  who  are  pre- 
sented. If  by  chance  any  one  of  the  nobles  offers  his  son  to 
God  in  the  monastery,  and  the  boy  himself  is  a  minor  in  age, 
his  parents  shall  make  the  petition  of  which  we  have  spoken 
above.  And  with  an  oblation,  they  shall  wrap  the  petition 
and  the  hand  of  the  boy  in  the  linen  cloth  of  the  altar;  and 
thus  shall  they  offer  him.  Concerning  their  property,  either 
they  shall  promise  in  the  present  petition,  under  an  oath,  that 
they  will  never,  either  indirectly  or  otherwise,  give  him  anything 
at  any  time,  or  furnish  him  with  means  of  possessing  it.  Or, 
if  they  be  unwilling  to  do  this,  and  wish  to  offer  something  as 
alms  to  the  monastery  for  their  salvation,  they  shall  make  a 
donation  of  those  things  which  they  wish  to  give  to  the  mon- 


640    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

astery,  retaining  for  themselves  the  usufruct  if  they  so  wish. 
And  let  all  things  be  so  observed  that  no  suspicion  may  remain 
with  the  boy;  by  which,  as  we  have  learned  from  experience, 
being  deceived,  he  might  perish  (and  may  it  not  happen).  The 
poorer  ones  shall  do  likewise.  Those  who  have  nothing  at  all 
shall  simply  make  their  petitions;  and  with  an  oblation  they 
shall  offer  their  sons  before  witnesses. 

60.  Concerning  priests  who  may  wish  to  dwell  in  the  monas- 
tery. 61.  Concerning  pilgrim  monks,  how  they  are  to  he  re- 
ceived. 62.  Ordination  of  monks  as  priests.  63.  Concerning 
rank  in  the  congregation.  64.  Concerning  the  ordination  of  an 
Abbot.  65.  Concerning  the  Prior  of  the  monastery.  66.  Con- 
cerning the  Doorkeepers  of  the  monastery.  67.  Concerning 
brothers  sent  on  a  journey.  68.  If  impossibilities  are  imposed 
on  a  brother.  69.  That  in  the  monastery  one  shall  not  presume 
to  defend  another.  70.  That  no  one  shall  presume  to  strike 
another.  71.  That  they  shall  be  obedient  to  one  another.  72. 
Concerning  the  good  zeal  which  monks  ought  to  have. 

73.  Concerning  the  fact  that  not  every  just  observance  is  de- 
creed in  this  Rule.  We  have  written  down  this  Rule,  that  we 
may  show  those  observing  it  in  the  monasteries  how  to  have 
some  honesty  of  character  or  beginning  of  conversion.  But 
for  those  who  hasten  to  the  perfection  of  living,  there  are  the 
teachings  of  the  holy  Fathers;  the  observance  of  which  leads 
a  man  to  the  heights  of  perfection.  For  what  page  or  what 
discourse  of  divine  authority  in  the  Old  or  New  Testament 
is  not  a  more  perfect  rule  of  human  life?  Or  what  book  of  the 
holy  and  CathoHc  Fathers  does  not  trumpet  forth  how  by  the 
right  road  we  shall  come  to  our  Creator? 

Also  the  reading  aloud  of  the  Fathers,  and  their  decrees 
and  lives;  also  the  Rule  of  our  holy  Father  Basil — what  else 
are  they  except  instruments  of  virtue  for  good  living  and  obe- 
dient monks?  But  to  us  who  are  idle  and  evil  hvers  and  negli- 
gent there  is  the  blush  of  confusion.  Thou,  therefore,  who- 
ever hastens  to  the  heavenly  fatherland,  perform  with  Christ's 
aid  this  Rule  written  out  as  the  least  beginnings;  and  then  at 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  641 

length,  under  God's  protection,  thou  wilt  come  to  the  greater 
things  that  we  have  mentioned — to  the  summits  of  teaching 
and  virtue. 

(B)  FormulcB. 

The  following /ormw/^  are  given  to  illustrate  the  Rule  in  its 
working.  The  first  group  bear  upon  the  vow  of  stahilitas  loci. 
The  case  not  infrequently  arose  that  a  brother  wished  to  go 
to  a  monastery  in  which  the  observance  of  the  Rule  was 
stricter.  In  case  a  new  foundation  was  begun  anywhere,  the 
first  monks  were  almost  always  from  another  monastery.  If 
therefore  the  monk  is  to  remove,  he  must  obtain  permission  of 
his  abbot,  and  this  was  not  regarded  as  a  violation  of  the  vow 
of  stahilitas  loci  and  obedience  to  his  abbot.  These  formulce 
were  not  uniform  throughout  the  Church,  but  the  following 
are  given  as  samples  of  early  practice. 

I.     Letters  dimissory.     (MSL,  66  :  859.) 

{a)  To  all  bishops  and  all  orders  of  the  holy  Church,  and 
to  all  faithful  people. 

Be  it  known  unto  you  that  I  have  given  Hcense  to  this  our 
brother,  John  or  Paul  by  name,  that  where  he  finds  it  agreeable 
to  dwell  in  order  to  lead  the  monastic  life,  he  shall  have  li- 
cense to  dwell  for  the  benefit  of  himself  and  the  monastery. 

(6)  Since  such  a  brother  desires  to  dwell  in  another  monas- 
tery, where,  as  it  seems  to  him,  he  can  save  his  soul  and  serve 
God,  know  then  that  by  these  letters  dimissory,  we  have 
given  him  license  to  go  to  another  monastery. 

(c)  From  the  Consuetudines  of  the  Monastery  of  St.  Paul 
at  Rome. 

I,  a  humble  abbot.  You  should  know,  beloved,  that  this 
brother,  John  or  Paul  by  name,  has  asked  us  to  give  him  per- 
mission to  dwell  with  you.  And,  because  we  know  that  you 
observe  the  Rule  of  the  order,  we  assent  to  his  dwelling  with 


642    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

you.  I  now  commend  him  to  you,  that  you  may  treat  him 
as  I  would,  and  for  him  you  are  to  render  an  account  to  God 
as  I  would  have  had  to  render. 

(d)  Another  from  the  same. 

To  the  venerable  father  the  abbot  of  (  .  .  .  )  monastery, 
the  abbot  of  ( .  .  . )  monastery  greeting  with  a  holy  kiss.  Since 
our  monastery  has  been  burdened  with  various  embarrass- 
ments and  poverty,  we  beseech  your  brotherliness  that  you 
will  receive  our  brother  to  dwell  in  your  monastery,  and 
we  commend  him  by  these  letters  of  commendation  and 
dismission  to  your  jurisdiction  and  obedience. ' 

Alternate  conclusion: 

We  send  him  from  our  obedience  to  serve  the  Lord  under 
your  obedience. 

2.     Offering  of  a  child  to  a  monastery.     (MSL,  66  :  842.) 

The  following  forms  should  be  compared  with  chapter  59  of  the  Rule. 
Children  so  offered  were  known  as  oblati,  i.  e.,  offered.  These  forms 
are  from  a  manuscript  of  the  ninth  century. 

(a)  To  ofier  children  to  God  is  sanctioned  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  as  Abraham^  .  .  .  are  related  to  have  done. 
Moved  by  the  example  of  these  and  many  others,  I  (  .  .  .  ) 
do  now,  for  the  salvation  of  my  soul  and  for  the  salvation 
of  the  souls  of  my  parents,  offer  in  the  presence  of  the 
abbot  (...)  this  my  son  (...)  to  Almighty  God  and  to 
St.  Mary  His  mother,  according  to  the  Rule  of  the  blessed 
Benedict  in  the  Monastery  of  Mons  Major,  so  that  from  this 
day  forth  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  him  to  withdraw  his  neck 
from  the  yoke  of  this  service;  and  I  promise  never,  by  myself 
or  by  any  agent,  to  give  him  in  any  way  opportunity  of  leav- 
ing, and  that  this  writing  may  be  confirmed  I  sign  it  with 
my  own  hand. 

(b)  Brief  form. 

^  Lacuna  in  text. 


THE  NEW  MONASTICISM  643 

I  give  this  boy  in  devotion  to  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  before 
God  and  His  saints,  that  he  may  remain  all  the  days  of  his 
life  and  become  a  monk  until  his  death. 

3.  Ceremony  of  receiving  a  monk  into  a  Benedictine  monas- 
tery.    (MSL,  66  :  829.) 

(a)  From  Peter  Boherius,  Commentary  on  the  Regula  S. 
Benedicti,  ch.  58  of  the  Rule,  v.  supra. 

When  the  novice  makes  his  solemn  profession,  the  abbot 
vests  to  say  mass,  and  after  the  offertory  the  abbot  interro- 
gates him  saying: 

Brother  (such  a  one) :  Is  it  your  will  to  renounce  the  world 
and  all  its  pomps  ? 

He  answers:  It  is. 

Abbot:  Will  you  promise  obedience  according  to  the  Rule 
of  St.  Benedict?    Answer:  I  will. 

Abbot:  May  God  give  you  his  aid. 

Then  the  novice,  or  some  one  at  his  request,  reads  the  afore- 
said profession,  and  when  it  has  been  read  he  places  it  upon 
his  head,  and  then  upon  the  altar.  After  this,  when  he  has 
prostrated  himself  on  his  knees  in  four  directions  in  the  form 
of  a  cross,  he  says  the  verse:  Receive  me,  O  Lord,  etc.  And 
then  the  Gloria  Patri,  the  Kyrie  Eleison,  the  Pater  Noster 
and  the  Litany  are  said,  the  novice  remaining  prostrate  on  the 
ground  before  the  altar,  until  the  end  of  the  mass.  And  the 
brothers  ought  to  be  in  the  choir  kneeling  while  the  Litany 
is  said.  When  the  Litany  has  been  said,  then  shall  follow  very 
devoutly  the  special  prayers  as  commanded  by  the  Fathers, 
and  immediately  after  the  communion  and  before  the  prayer 
is  said,  the  garments  of  the  novice,  which  have  been  folded 
and  placed  before  the  altar,  shall  be  blessed  with  their  proper 
prayers;  and  they  shall  be  anointed  and  sprinkled  with  holy 
water  by  the  abbot.  After  "Ite,  missa  est'^'^  the  novice  rises 
from  the  ground,  and  having  put  off  his  old  garments  which 
were  not  blessed  he  puts  on  those  which  have  been  blessed, 
while  the  abbot  recites :  Exuat  te  Dominus,  etc. 

^  The  conclusion  of  the  mass. 


644    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

And  when  the  kiss  has  been  given  by  the  abbot,  all  the 
brothers  in  turn  give  him  the  kiss  of  peace,  and  he  shall  keep 
silence  for  three  days  continuously  after  this,  going  about 
with  his  head  covered  and  receiving  the  communion  every  day. 

{b)  From  Theodore  of  Canterbury,  ibid.,  827. 

In  the  ordination  of  monks  the  abbot  ought  to  say  mass, 
and  say  three  prayers  over  the  head  of  the  novice;  and  for 
seven  days  he  veils  his  head  with  his  cowl,  and  on  the  seventh 
day  the  abbot  takes  the  veil  off. 

(c)  The  Vow.     From  another  form,  ibid. 

I  promise  concerning  my  stability  and  conversion  of  life 
and  obedience  according  to  the  Rule  of  St.  Benedict  before 
God  and  His  saints. 

§  105.    Foundation  of  Medieval  Culture  and  Schools 

Schools  never  wholly  disappeared  from  Western  society, 
either  during  the  barbarian  invasion  or  in  the  even  more 
troublous  times  that  followed.  Secular  schools  continued 
throughout  the  fifth  century.  During  the  sixth  century  they 
gave  way  for  the  most  part  to  schools  fostered  by  the  Church, 
or  were  thoroughly  transformed  by  ecclesiastical  influences. 
In  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  the  great  compends  were  made 
that  served  as  text-books  for  centuries.  Boethius,  Cassio- 
dorus,  Isidore  of  Seville,  and  Bede  represent  great  steps  in  the 
preparation  for  the  mediaeval  schools.  But,  apart  from  the 
survival  of  old  schools,  there  was  a  real  demand  for  the  es- 
tablishment of  new  schools.  The  new  monasticism  needed 
them.  It  required  some  reading  and  study  every  day  by 
the  monks.  As  children  were  constantly  being  received,  ordi- 
narily at  the  age  of  seven,  these  oblati  needed  instruction. 
The  monastic  schools,  which  thus  arose,  early  made  provision 
for  the  instruction  of  those  not  destined  for  the  monastic  life 
in  the  external  schools  of  the  monasteries.  Then  again,  the 
need  of  clergy  with  some  literary  training,  however  simple, 


FOUNDATION  OF  MEDIEVAL   CULTURE    645 

was  felt,  especially  as  the  secular  schools  declined  or  were 
found  not  convenient,  and  conciliar  action  was  taken  in  vari- 
ous countries  to  provide  for  such  education.  In  the  con- 
version of  the  English,  schools  seem  very  early  to  have  been 
estabhshed,  and  the  encouragement  given  these  schools  by  the 
learned  Theodore  of  Tarsus,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  bore 
splendid  fruit,  not  merely  in  the  great  school  of  Canterbury 
but  still  more  in  the  monastic  schools  of  the  North,  at  Jarrow 
and  Wearmouth  and  at  York.  It  was  from  the  schools  in 
the  North  that  the  culture  of  the  Frankish  kingdom  under 
Charles  the  Great  largely  came.  There  was  always  a  marked 
difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  value  of  secular  literature  in 
education,  as  is  shown  by  the  attitude  already  taken  by  Gre- 
gory the  Great  in  his  letter  to  Desiderius  of  Vienne,  a  letter 
which  did  much  to  discourage  the  literary  study  of  the  classics. 

(a)  Augustine,  De  Doctrina  Christiana,  II,  40  (§  60).  (MSL, 

34:63). 

The  Christian's  use  of  heathen  writers. 

The  whole  book  should  be  examined  carefully  to  see  the  working  out 
of  the  same  idea  in  detail.  St.  Augustine  was  a  man  of  literary  cul- 
ture, although  he  was  imperfectly  acquainted  with  Greek.  He  speaks 
from  his  own  experience  of  the  help  he  had  derived  from  this  cuhure. 
The  work  On  Christian  Doctrine  is,  in  fact,  not  at  all  a  treatise  on  the- 
ology but  on  pedagogy,  and  was  of  immense  influence  in  the  Middle 
Ages. 

If  those  who  are  called  philosophers  and  especially  the  Pla- 
tonists  have  said  anything  true  and  in  harmony  with  the  faith, 
we  ought  not  only  not  to  shrink  from  it,  but  rather  to  appro- 
priate it  for  our  own  use,  taking  it  from  them  as  from  unlaw- 
ful possessors.  For  as  the  Egyptians  had  not  only  the  idols 
and  heavy  burdens,  which  the  people  of  Israel  hated  and  fled 
from,  but  also  vessels  and  ornaments  of  gold  and  silver  and 
clothing  which  the  same  people  on  going  out  of  Egypt  se- 
cretly appropriated  to  themselves  as  for  a  better  use,  not  on 
their  own  authority  but  on  the  command  of  God,  for  the 
Egyptians  in   their  ignorance  lent  those  things  which  they 


646    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

themselves  were  not  using  well  [Ex.  3  :  22;  12  135];  in  the 
same  way  all  branches  of  heathen  learning  have  not  only 
false  and  superstitious  fancies  and  heavy  burdens  of  unneces- 
sary toil  which  each  of  us,  in  going  out  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Christ  from  the  fellowship  of  the  heathen,  ought  to 
hate  and  avoid;  but  they  contain  also  liberal  instruction 
which  it  is  well  to  adapt  to  the  use  of  truth  and  some  most 
useful  precepts  of  morahty;  and  some  truths  in  regard  even 
to  the  worship  of  the  one  God  are  found  among  them.  Now 
these  are,  so  to  speak,  their  gold  and  silver,  which  they  them- 
selves did  not  create,  but  dug,  as  it  were,  out  of  certain 
mines  of  God's  providence,  which  are  everywhere  scattered 
abroad,  and  are  perversely  and  unlawfully  misused  to  the 
worship  of  devils.  These,  therefore,  the  Christian,  when  he 
separates  himself  in  spirit  from  the  miserable  fellowship  of 
these  men,  ought  to  take  away  from  them  for  their  proper 
use  in  preaching  the  Gospel.  Their  clothing  also,  that  is, 
human  institutions,  adapted  to  that  intercourse  with  men 
which  is  indispensable  for  this  life,  it  is  right  to  take  and  to 
have  so  as  to  be  turned  to  Christian  use. 

(b)  John  Cassian,  Institutiones,  V,  33,  34.  (MSL,  49  : 
249.) 

Cassian,  born  360,  was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  monastic  movement. 
He  founded  monasteries  near  Marseilles,  and  did  much  to  spread  the 
monastic  movement  in  Gaul  and  Spain.  His  Institutiones  and  Colla- 
tiones  were  of  influence,  even  after  his  monasteries  had  been  entirely 
supplanted  by  the  Benedictines.  The  opinion  here  given  is  probably 
that  prevalent  in  the  monasteries  in  Egypt.  It  is  utterly  different 
from  the  spirit  of  Basil,  and  the  great  theologians  of  Asia  Minor  who, 
in  the  matter  of  secular  studies,  hold  the  same  opinion  as  the  older 
Alexandrian  school  of  Clement  and  Origen. 

Ch.  33.  We  also  saw  the  abbot  Theodore,  a  man  endowed 
with  the  utmost  hoKness  and  with  perfect  knowledge  not  only 
of  things  of  the  practical  life  but  also  of  the  meaning  of  the 
Scriptures,  which  he  had  acquired,  not  so  much  by  study  and 
reading,  or  secular  scholarship,  as  by  purity  of  heart  alone; 


FOUNDATION  OF  MEDIEVAL  CULTURE    647 

since  he  was  able  only  with  difficulty  to  understand  or  speak 
even  but  a  few  words  in  the  Greek  language.  This  man,  when 
he  was  seeking  an  explanation  of  some  most  difficult  question, 
continued  indefatigably  seven  days  and  nights  in  prayer 
until,  by  a  revelation  of  the  Lord,  he  knew  the  answer  to  the 
question  propounded. 

Ch.  34.  This  man,  therefore,  when  some  of  the  brethren 
were  wondering  at  the  splendid  light  of  his  knowledge,  and 
were  asking  him  some  meanings  of  Scripture,  said:  "A  monk 
desiring  to  attain  to  a  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  ought  in 
no  wise  to  spend  his  labor  on  the  books  of  the  commentators, 
but  rather  to  keep  all  the  efforts  of  his  mind  and  the  inten- 
tions of  his  heart  set  on  purification  from  carnal  vices.  When 
these  are  driven  out,  at  once  the  eyes  of  the  heart,  when  the 
veil  of  passions  has  been  removed,  will  begin,  as  it  were,  nat- 
urally to  gaze  on  the  mysteries  of  Scripture,  since  these  were 
not  declared  unto  us  by  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  remain 
unknown  and  obscure;  but  they  are  rendered  obscure  by  our 
vices,  as  the  veil  of  our  sins  cover  the  eyes  of  the  heart,  and 
for  these,  when  restored  to  their  natural  health,  the  mere 
reading  of  Holy  Scripture  is  amply  sufficient  for  the  percep- 
tion of  the  true  knowledge;  nor  do  they  need  the  instruc- 
tion of  commentators,  just  as  these  eyes  of  flesh  need  no 
man's  assistance  to  see  provided  they  are  free  from  the  dim- 
ness or  darkness  of  blindness." 

(c)  Gregory  the  Great,  Ep.  ad  Desiderium,  Reg.  XI,  ep. 

54.     (MSL,  77  :ii7i.) 

Desiderius  was  bishop  of  Vienne.  This  letter  was  sent  with  several 
others  written  in  connection  with  the  sending  of  Mellitus  to  England; 
see  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  1,  27,  29. 

Many  good  things  have  been  reported  to  us  regarding  your 
pursuits,  and  such  joy  arose  in  our  hearts  that  we  could  not 
bear  to  refuse  what  your  fraternity  had  requested  to  have 
granted  you.  But  afterward  it  came  to  our  ears,  what  we  can- 
not mention  without  shame,  that  thy  fraternity  is  in  the  habit 


648    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

of  expounding  grammar  to  certain  persons.  This  thing  pained 
us  so  and  we  so  strongly  disapproved  of  it  that  we  changed 
what  had  been  said  before  into  groaning  and  sadness,  since 
the  praises  of  Christ  cannot  find  room  in  the  one  mouth  with 
the  praises  of  Jupiter.  And  consider  thyself  what  a  grave 
and  heinous  offence  it  is  for  bishops  to  sing  what  is  not  be- 
coming even  for  a  religious  layman.  And,  though  our  most 
beloved  son  Cardidus,  the  presbyter,  who  was  strictly  examined 
on  this  matter  when  he  came  to  us,  denied  it  and  endeav- 
ored to  excuse  you,  yet  still  the  thought  has  not  left  our 
mind  that,  in  proportion  as  it  is  execrable  for  such  a  thing 
to  be  related  of  a  priest,  it  ought  to  be  ascertained  by  strict 
and  veracious  evidence  whether  or  not  it  be  so.  If,  there- 
fore, hereafter  what  has  been  reported  to  us  should  prove  to  be 
evidently  false,  and  it  should  be  clear  that  you  do  not  apply 
yourself  to  trifles  and  secular  literature,  we  shall  give  thanks 
to  God,  who  has  not  permitted  your  heart  to  be  stained  with 
the  blasphemous  phrases  of  what  is  abominable;  and  we  will 
treat  without  misgiving  or  hesitation  concerning  granting 
what  you  have  requested. 

We  commend  to  you  in  all  respects  the  monks  whom,  to- 
gether with  our  most  beloved  son  Laurentius,  the  presbyter, 
and  Mellitus,  the  abbot,  we  have  sent  to  our  most  reverend 
brother  and  fellow-bishop  Augustine,  that  by  the  help  of  your 
fraternity  no  delay  may  hinder  their  journey. 

(d)  Council  of  Vaison,  A.  D.  529,  Canon  i.    Bruns,  II,  183. 

Vaison  is  a  small  see  in  the  province  of  Aries.  The  synod  was  at- 
tended by  about  a  dozen  bishops.  It  is,  therefore,  not  authoritative 
for  a  large  district,  but  when  taken  in  connection  with  the  following 
selection  indicates  a  wide-spread  custom. 

That  presbyters  in  their  parishes  shall  bring  up  and  in- 
struct young  readers  in  their  houses.  It  was  decided  that  all 
presbyters  who  are  placed  in  parishes  should,  according  to  a 
custom  which  we  learn  is  very  beneficially  observed  through- 
out Italy,  receive  young  readers,  as  many  as  they  have  who 


FOUNDATION  OF  MEDIEVAL  CULTURE    649 

are  unmarried,  into  their  house  where  they  dwell,  and  as  good 
fathers  shall  endeavor  to  bring  them  up  spiritually  to  render 
the  Psalms,  and  to  instruct  them  in  the  divine  readings,  and 
to  educate  them  in  the  law  of  the  Lord,  that  so  they  may  pro- 
vide for  themselves  worthy  successors,  and  receive  from  the 
Lord  eternal  rewards.  But  when  they  come  to  full  age,  if 
any  of  them,  on  account  of  the  weakness  of  the  flesh,  wish  to 
marry,  they  shall  not  be  denied  the  right  of  doing  so. 

(e)  II  Council  of  Toledo,  A.  D.  531,  Caizow  I.    Bruns,  I,  207. 

Concerning  those  whom  their  parents  voluntarily  give  in 
the  first  years  of  their  childhood  to  the  office  of  the  clergy, 
we  have  decreed  this  to  be  observed;  namely,  that  as  soon  as 
they  have  been  tonsured  or  have  been  given  to  the  care  of  ap- 
pointed persons,  they  ought  to  be  educated  by  some  one  set 
over  them,  in  the  church  building,  and  in  the  presence  of  the 
bishop.  When  they  have  completed  their  eighteenth  year, 
they  shall  be  asked  by  the  bishop,  in  the  presence  of  all  the 
clergy  and  people,  their  will  as  to  seeking  marriage.  And  if 
by  God's  inspiration  they  have  the  grace  of  chastity,  and  shall 
have  promised  to  observe  the  profession  of  their  chastity 
without  any  necessity  of  marriage,  let  these  who  are  more 
desirous  of  the  hardest  Hfe  put  on  the  most  gentle  yoke  of 
the  Lord,  and  first  let  them  receive  from  their  twentieth  year 
the  ministry  of  the  subdiaconate,  probation  having  been 
made  of  their  profession,  that,  if  blamelessly  and  without 
offence  they  attain  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  their  age,  they 
may  be  promoted  to  the  office  of  the  diaconate,  if  they  have 
been  proved  by  their  bishop  to  be  able  to  fulfil  it.  .  .  . 

(/)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  III,  18.     (MSL,  95  :  144.) 

Sigebert  became  king  of  the  East  Angles  about  631  and  died  637. 
The  facts  known  of  him  are  briefly  recorded  in  DCB. 

At  this  time  the  kingdom  of  the  East  Angles,  after  the  death 
of  Earpwald,  the  successor  of  Redwald,  was  subject  to  his 
brother  Sigebert,  a  good  and  rehgious  man,  who  long  before 


650    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

had  been  baptized  in  France,  whilst  he  Hved  in  banishment, 
flying  from  the  enmity  of  Redwald;  when  he  returned  home 
and  had  ascended  the  throne  he  was  desirous  of  imitating  the 
good  institutions  which  he  had  seen  in  France,  and  he  set  up  a 
school  for  the  young  to  be  instructed  in  letters,  and  was  as- 
sisted therein  by  Bishop  Felix,  who  had  come  to  him  from 
Kent  and  who  furnished  him  with  masters  and  teachers  after 
the  manner  of  that  country. 

(g)  Bede,  Hist.  Ec,  IV,  2.     (MSL,  95  :  i73.) 

Theodore  arrived  at  his  church  the  second  year  after  his 
consecration,  on  Sunday,  May  27,  and  held  the  same  twenty- 
one  years,  three  months  and  twenty-six  days.  Soon  after 
he  visited  all  the  islands,  wherever  the  tribes  of  the  Angles 
dwelt,  for  he  was  willingly  entertained  and  heard  by  all  per- 
sons. Everywhere  he  was  attended  and  assisted  by  Hadrian, 
and  he  taught  the  right  rule  of  Hfe  and  the  canonical  custom 
of  celebrating  Easter.^  This  was  the  first  archbishop  whom 
all  the  English  Church  obeyed.  And  forasmuch  as  both 
of  them  were,  as  has  been  said,  well  read  in  sacred  and 
secular  literature,  they  gathered  a  crowd  of  scholars  and 
there  daily  flowed  from  them  rivers  of  knowledge  to  water 
the  hearts  of  their  hearers;  and  together  with  the  books  of 
the  holy  Scriptures  they  also  taught  them  the  arts  of  eccle- 
siastical poetry,  astronomy,  and  arithmetic.  A  testimony  of 
which  is  that  there  are  still  living  at  this  day  [circa  A.  D.  727] 
some  of  their  scholars  who  are  as  well  versed  in  the  Greek  and 
Latin  tongues  as  in  their  own,  in  which  they  were  born. 
Never  were  there  happier  times  since  the  English  came  to 
Britain;  for  their  kings  were  brave  men  and  good  Christians 
and  were  a  terror  to  all  barbarous  nations,  and  the  minds  of 
all  men  were  bent  upon  the  joys  of  the  heavenly  kingdom  of 
which  they  had  just  heard.  And  all  who  desired  instruction 
in  sacred  reading  had  masters  at  hand  to  teach  them.  From 
that  time  also  they  began  in  all  the  churches  of  the  English 
^  F.  supra,  §  100. 


FOUNDATION  OF  MEDIEVAL   CULTURE    651 

to  learn  sacred  music  which  till  then  had  been  only  known 
in  Kent.  And  excepting  James,  mentioned  above,  the  first 
singing-master^  in  the  churches  of  the  Northumbrians  was 
Eddi,  surnamed  Stephen,  invited  from  Kent  by  the  most 
reverend  Wilfrid,  who  was  the  first  of  the  bishops  of  the  Eng- 
lish nation  that  taught  the  churches  of  the  English  the  Cath- 
olic mode  of  life^ 

Qi)  Council  of  Clovesho,  A.  D.  747,  Canon  7.  Haddan 
and  Stubbs,  III,  360. 

They  decreed  in  the  seventh  article  of  agreement  that 
bishops,  abbots,  and  abbesses  should  by  all  means  take  care 
and  dihgently  provide  that  their  families  should  incessantly 
apply  their  minds  to  reading,  and  that  knowledge  be  spread 
by  the  voices  of  many  to  the  gaining  of  souls  and  to  the  praise 
of  the  eternal  King.  For  it  is  sad  to  say  how  few^  in  these 
times  do  heartily  love  and  labor  for  sacred  knowledge  and 
are  willing  to  take  pains  in  learning,  but  they  are  from 
their  youth  up  rather  employed  in  divers  vanities  and  the 
affectation  of  vainglory;  and  they  rather  pursue  the  amuse- 
ments of  this  present  unstable  life  than  the  assiduous  study  of 
holy  Scriptures.  Therefore  let  boys  be  kept  and  trained 
up  in  such  schools,  to  the  love  of  sacred  knowledge,  and 
that,  being  by  this  means  well  learned,  they  may  become  in 
all  respects  useful  to  the  Church  of  God. 

^  Further  on,  Bede  mentions  Putta,  bishop  of  Rochester,  who  was  "extraor- 
dinarily skilful  in  the  Roman  style  of  church  music,  which  he  had  learned  from 
the  pupils  of  the  holy  pope  Gregory." 

2  Monasticism  had  already  begun  to  decline  as  the  monasteries  increased  in 
wealth  and  numbers.  The  decline  continued  into  the  next  century,  when  the 
Church  was  at  its  worst  condition  about  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Alfred. 
The  revival  of  monasticism  was  not  until  the  tenth  century  as  a  result  of  the 
Cluny  Reform. 


652    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 


CHAPTER  IV.  THE  REVOLUTION  IN  THE  ECCLESIAS- 
TICAL AND  POLITICAL  SITUATION  DUE  TO  THE 
RISE  OF  ISLAM  AND  THE  DOCTRINAL  DISPUTES  IN 
THE   EASTERN   CHURCH 

In  the  course  of  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  the  eccle- 
siastical and  poHtical  situation  altered  completely.  This 
change  was  due,  in  the  first  place,  to  the  rise  of  the  reHgion 
and  empire  of  the  Moslems,  whereby  a  very  large  part  of  the 
Eastern  Empire  was  conquered  by  the  followers  of  the  Prophet, 
who  had  rapidly  extended  their  conquests  over  Syria  and  the 
best  African  provinces.  Reduced  in  extent  and  exposed  to 
ever  fresh  attacks  from  a  powerful  enemy,  the  Eastern  Empire 
had  to  face  new  political  problems.  In  the  second  place,  as 
the  provinces  overrun  contained  the  greater  number  of  those 
dissatisfied  with  the  doctrinal  results  of  the  great  councils, 
the  apparently  interminable  contests  over  the  question  as 
to  the  two  natures  of  Christ  came  to  an  unexpected  end. 
This  did  not  take  place  until  a  new  cause  for  dispute  had  arisen 
among  the  adherents  of  Chalcedon,  due  to  an  attempt  to  win 
back  the  Monophysites  by  accounting  for  the  unity  of  the  per- 
son of  Christ  by  positing  one  will  in  Jesus.  Monotheletism  at 
once  became  among  the  adherents  of  Chalcedon  a  burning  ques- 
tion. It  was  finally  condemned  at  the  Sixth  General  Council, 
Constantinople,  A.  D.  683,  at  which  PopeAgatho  played  a  part 
very  similar  to  that  played  by  Pope  Leo  at  Chalcedon,  but  at 
the  cost  of  seeing  his  predecessor,  Honorius,  condemned  as  a 
Monothelete.  It  was  the  last  triumph  of  the  West  in  the  dog- 
matic controversies  of  the  East.  The  Eastern  ecclesiastics, 
irritated  at  the  diplomatic  triumph  of  Rome,  expressed  their 
resentment  at  the  ConciHum  Quinisextum,  in  692,  where,  in 
passing  canons  to  complete  the  work  of  the  Fifth  and  Sixth 
Councils,  an  opportunity  was  embraced  of  expressly  condemn- 
ing several  Roman  practices.  In  the  confusion  resulting  in 
the  next  century  from  the  attempt  of  Leo  the  Isaurian  to  put 


THE  RISE  AND   EXTENSION  OF   ISLAM      653 

an  end  to  the  use  of  images  in  the  churches,  the  Roman  see 
was  able  to  rid  itself  of  the  nominal  control  which  the  Emperor 
still  had  over  the  papacy  by  means  of  the  exarchate  of  Ravenna. 
When  the  Lombards  pressed  too  heavily  upon  the  papacy 
it  was  easy  for  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  make  an  alhance  with 
the  Franks,  who  on  their  side  saw  that  it  was  profitable  to 
employ  the  papacy  in  the  advancement  of  their  own  schemes. 
In  this  way  arose  that  alliance  between  the  pontiff  and  the 
new  Frankish  monarchy  upon  which  the  ecclesiastical  devel- 
opment of  the  Middle  Ages  rests.  But  Iconoclasm  suffered 
defeat  at  the  Seventh  General  Council,  787,  in  which  the 
doctrinal  system  of  the  East  was  completed.  As  this  was  the 
last  undisputed  general  council,  it  may  be  taken  as  marking 
the  termination  of  the  history  of  the  ancient  Church.  In 
following  the  further  course  of  the  Western  Church  there  is 
no  longer  need  of  a  detailed  tracing  of  the  history  of  the 
Eastern  Church,  which  ceased  to  be  a  determining  factor  in 
the  religious  hfe  of  the  West.  The  two  parts  of  Christendom 
come  in  contact  from  time  to  time,  but  without  formal  schism 
they  have  ceased  to  be  organically  united. 

§  106.     The  Rise  and  Extension  of  Islam. 

§  107.  The  Monothelete  Controversy  and  the  Sixth  Gen- 
eral Council,  Constantinople,  A.  D.  681. 

§  108.  Rome  in  Relation  to  the  Eastern  Empire  and  the 
Lombard  State. 

§  109.  Rome,  the  Eastern  Empire,  and  the  Lombard  State 
in  the  First  Iconoclastic  Controversy.  The 
Seventh  General  Council,  Nicaea,  A.  D.  787. 

§  106.    The  Rise  and  Extension  of  Islam 

Mohammed  (571-632)  began  his  work  as  a  prophet  at 
Mecca  about  613,  having  been  ''called"  about  three  years 
earlier.  He  was  driven  from  Mecca  in  622  and  fled  to  Yathrib, 
afterward  known  as  Medina.  Here  he  was  able  to  unite  war- 
ring factions  and,  placing  himself  at  their  head,  to  build  up 


654    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

despotic  authority  over  the  surrounding  country.  He  steadily 
increased  the  territory  under  his  sway,  and  by  conquests  and 
diplomacy  was  able  to  gain  Mecca  in  629.  Before  his  death 
in  632  he  had  conquered  all  Arabia.  His  authority  continued 
in  his  family  after  his  death,  and  the  course  of  conquest  went 
on.  Damascus  was  conquered  in  635;  in  636  the  Emperor 
Heraclius  was  driven  to  abandon  Syria,  which  now  fell  into 
the  hands  of  the  Moslems.  In  637  the  Persians  were  forced 
back.  In  640  Egypt  was  taken,  and  by  650  all  between  Car- 
thage and  the  eastern  border  of  Persia  had  been  acquired  for 
Islam.  In  693,  after  a  period  of  civil  war,  the  work  of  con- 
quest was  resumed.  In  709  all  the  African  coast  as  far  as 
the  Straits  of  Gibraltar  was  gained,  and  in  711  the  Moslems 
entered  Spain.  They  at  once  made  themselves  masters  of 
the  peninsula  with  the  exception  of  a  small  strip  in  the  north 
in  the  mountains  of  Asturias,  the  kingdom  of  Gallicia.  Cross- 
ing the  Pyrenees,  they  attempted  to  possess  Gaul,  but  were 
forced  to  retreat  from  central  Gaul  by  Charles  M artel  at  the 
battle  at  Tours  and  Poitiers  in  732.  They  maintained  them- 
selves north  of  the  Pyrenees  until  759  when  they  were  driven 
out  of  Narbonne  and  across  the  mountains. 

Additional  source  material:  The  Koran,  standard  translation  by 
E.  H.  Palmer,  in  the  Sacred  Books  of  the  East;  Stanley  Lane-Poole, 
Speeches  and  Table  Talk  of  the  Prophet  Mohammed. 

(a)  Mohammed,  Koran  (translation  of  E.  H.  Palmer). 
Surah  CXII. 

The  Unity  of  God. 

The  following  surah  or  chapter  of  the  Koran,  entitled  ''The  Chapter 
of  Unity,"  Mohammed  regarded  as  of  value  equal  to  two-thirds  of  the 
whole  book.     It  is  one  of  the  shortest  and  most  famous. 

In  the  name  of  the  merciful  and  compassionate  God,  say: 
'^He  is  God  alone! 
God  the  Eternal. 

He  begets  not  and  is  not  begotten! 
Nor  is  there  like  unto  Him  any  one." 


THE  RISE  AND   EXTENSION  OF  ISLAM     655 

Surah  V,  73,  76,  109/. 

The  teaching  as  to  the  nature  and  mission  of  Jesus. 

[73-]  Verily,  those  who  believe  and  those  who  are  Jews, 
and  the  Sabaeans,  and  the  Christians,  whosoever  beheves  in 
God  and  the  last  day  and  does  what  is  right,  there  is  no  fear 
for  them,  nor  shall  they  grieve. 

[76.]  They  misbelieve  who  say,  ''Verily,  God  is  the  Mes- 
siah, the  son  of  Mary";  but  the  Messiah  said,  ''0  Children  of 
Israel,  worship  God,  my  Lord  and  your  Lord."  Verily  he 
who  associates  aught  with  God,  God  hath  forbidden  him  para- 
dise, and  his  resort  is  the  fire,  and  the  unjust  shall  have  none 
to  help  them. 

They  misbelieve  who  say,  "Verily,  God  is  the  third  of 
three";  for  there  is  no  God  but  one,  and  if  they  do  not  desist 
from  what  they  say,  there  shall  touch  those  who  misbeheve 
amongst  them  grievous  woe. 

Will  they  not  turn  toward  God  and  ask  pardon  of  Him? 
for  God  is  forgiving  and  merciful. 

The  Messiah,  the  son  of  Mary,  is  only  a  prophet;  prophets 
before  him  have  passed  away :  and  His  mother  was  a  confessor. 

[109.]  When  God  said,  ''0  Jesus,  son  of  Mary!  remember 
my  favors  towards  thee  and  towards  thy  mother,  when  I 
aided  thee  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  till  thou  didst  speak  to  men 
in  the  cradle  and  when  grown  up. 

"And  when  I  taught  thee  the  Book  and  wisdom  and  the  law 
and  the  gospel;  when  thou  didst  create  of  clay,  as  it  were,  the 
likeness  of  a  bird,  by  my  power,  and  didst  blow  thereon,  it 
became  a  bird;^  and  thou  didst  heal  the  blind  from  birth, 
and  the  leprous  by  my  permission;  and  when  thou  didst 
bring  forth  the  dead  by  my  permission;  and  when  I  did  ward 
off  the  children  of  Israel  from  thee,  and  when  thou  didst  come 
to  them  with  manifest  signs,  and  those  who  misbeheved 
among  them  said:  'This  is  naught  but  obvious  magic' 

"And  when  I  inspired  the  Apostles  that  they  should  beheve 

^  See  Arabic  Gospel  of  the  Infancy,  c.  46;  ANF,  viii,  415. 


656    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

in  Him  and  in  my  Apostle,  they  said,  'We  believe;   do  thou 
bear  witness  that  we  are  resigned.'" 

[116.]  And  when  God  said,  "0  Jesus,  son  of  Mary!  is  it 
thou  who  dost  say  to  men,  take  me  and  my  mother  for  two 
gods,  beside  God?"  He  said:  ''I  celebrate  thy  praise!  what 
ails  me  that  I  should  say  what  I  have  no  right  to?  If  I  had 
said  it,  Thou  wouldest  have  known  it;  Thou  knowest  what  is 
in  my  soul,  but  I  know  not  what  is  in  Thy  soul;  verily  Thou 
art  one  who  knoweth  the  unseen.  I  never  told  them  save 
what  Thou  didst  bid  me,  'Worship  God,  my  Lord  and  your 
Lord,'  and  I  was  a  witness  against  them  so  long  as  I  was 
among  them,  but  when  Thou  didst  take  me  away  to  Thyself 
Thou  wert  the  watcher  over  them,  for  Thou  art  witness  over 
all."  .  .  . 

Surah  IV,  152. 

Relation  of  Islam  to  Judaism  and  Christianity. 

[152.]  The  people  of  the  Book  will  ask  thee  to  bring  down 
for  them  a  book  from  heaven ;  but  they  asked  Moses  a  greater 
thing  than  that,  for  they  said,  "Show  us  God  openly";  but 
the  thunderbolt  caught  them  in  their  injustice.  Then  they 
took  a  calf,  after  what  had  come  to  them  of  manifest  signs; 
but  we  pardoned  that,  and  gave  Moses  obvious  authority.  And 
we  held  over  them  the  mountain  at  their  compact,  and  said 
to  them,  "Enter  ye  the  door  adoring,"  and  we  said  to  them, 
"Transgress  not  on  the  Sabbath  day,"  and  we  took  from  them 
a  rigid  compact. 

But  for  that  they  broke  their  compact,  and  for  their  mis- 
belief in  God's  signs,  and  for  their  killing  the  prophets  unde- 
servedly, and  for  their  saying,  "Our  hearts  are  uncircumcised" 
— nay,  God  hath  stamped  on  them  their  misbelief,  so  that 
they  cannot  believe,  except  a  few — and  for  their  misbelief, 
and  for  their  saying  about  Mary  a  mighty  calumny,  and  for 
their  saying,  "Verily  we  have  killed  the  Messiah,  Jesus  the 
son  of  Mary,  the  apostle  of  God,"  but  they  did  not  kill  Him, 
and  they  did  not  crucify  Him,  but  a  simiHtude  was  made  for 


THE  RISE  AND   EXTENSION    OF  ISLAM     657 

them.  And  verily,  those  who  differ  about  Him  are  in  doubt 
concerning  Him;  they  have  no  knowledge  concerning  Him,  but 
only  follow  an  opinion.  They  did  not  kill  Him,  for  sure  I  nay 
God  raised  Him  up  unto  Himself;  for  God  is  mighty  and 
wise!  .  .  . 

[164.]  0  ye  people  of  the  Book!  do  not  exceed  in  your  re- 
ligion, nor  say  against  God  save  the  truth.  The  Messiah, 
Jesus,  the  son  of  Mary,  is  but  the  apostle  of  God  and  His 
Word,  which  He  cast  into  Mary  and  a  spirit  from  Him;  be- 
Heve  then  in  God  and  His  apostles,  and  say  not  "Three.'' 
Have  done!  it  were  better  for  you.  God  is  only  one  God, 
celebrated  be  His  praise  that  He  should  beget  a  Son! 

Surah  LVL 

The  dehghts  of  heaven  and  the  pains  of  hell. 

This  description  of  the  future  life  has  been  taken  as  characteristic 
of  the  religion  of  Mohammed,  but  not  quite  fairly.  It  is  simply  the 
Bedouin's  idea  of  complete  happiness,  and  is  by  no  means  character- 
istic of.  the  religion  as  the  whole. 

In  the  name  of  the  merciful  and  compassionate  God. 

When  the  inevitable  [day  of  judgment]  happens;  none  shall 
call  its  happening  a  lie ! — abasing — exalting ! 

When  the  earth  shall  quake,  quaking!  and  the  moimtains 
shall  crumble,  crumbling,  and  become  like  motes  dispersed! 

And  ye  shall  be  three  sorts; 

And  the  fellows  of  the  right  hand — what  right  lucky  fellows! 

And  the  fellows  of  the  left  hand — what  unlucky  fellows! 

And  the  foremost  foremost! 

These  are  they  who  are  brought  nigh, 

In  gardens  of  pleasure! 

A  crowd  of  those  of  yore,  and  a  few  of  those  of  the  latter  day! 

And  gold-weft  couches,  reclining  on  them  face  to  face. 

Around  them  shall  go  eternal  youths,  with  goblets  and 
ewers  and  a  cup  of  flowing  wine;  no  headache  shall  feed 
therefrom,  nor  shall  their  wits  be  dimmed! 

And  fruits  such  as  they  deem  the  best; 

And  flesh  of  fowl  as  they  desire ; 


658    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

And  bright  and  large-eyed  maids  like  hidden  pearls; 

A  reward  for  that  which  they  have  done! 

They  shall  hear  no  folly  there  and  no  sin; 

Only  the  speech,  ''Peace,  Peace!" 

And  the  fellows  of  the  right — what  right  lucky  fellows! 

Amid  thornless  lote  trees. 

And  tal'h^  trees  with  piles  of  fruit; 

And  outspread  shade, 

And  water  poured  out; 

And  fruit  in  abundance,  neither  failing  nor  forbidden; 

And  beds  upraised! 

Verily  we  have  produced  them^  a  production, 

And  made  them  virgins,  darlings  of  equal  age  (with  their 
spouses)  for  the  fellows  of  the  right! 

A  crowd  of  those  of  yore,  and  a  crowd  of  those  of  the  latter 
day! 

And  the  fellows  of  the  left — what  unlucky  fellows! 

In  hot  blasts  and  boiling  water; 

And  a  shade  of  pitchy  smoke, 

Neither  cool  nor  generous! 

Verily  they  were  affluent  ere  this,  and  did  persist  in  mighty 
crime;  and  used  to  say,  ''What,  when  we  die,  have  become 
dust  and  bones,  shall  we  indeed  be  raised?  or  our  fathers  of 
yore?" 

Say,  "Verily,  those  of  yore  and  those  of  the  latter  days 
shall  surely  be  gathered  together  unto  the  tryst  of  the  well- 
known  day." 

'^Then  ye,  O  ye  who  err!  who  say  it  is  a  lie!  shall  eat  of  the 
Zaqqum^  tree  and  fill  your  beUies  with  it!  a  drink  of  boiling 
water!  and  drink  as  drinks  the  thirsty  camel!" 

(b)  Paulus  Diaconus,  Historia  Langobardorunij  VI,  46  ff. 
(MSL,  95  :  654.) 

The  Advance  of  the  Saracens. 

1  Probably  banana  is  meant.  ^  I.  e.,  the  celestial  damsels. 

'An  intensely  bitter  tree. 


THE  RISE  AND  EXTENSION  OF  ISLAM     659 

Ch.  46.  At  that  time  [A.  D.  711]  the  people  of  the  Sara- 
cens, crossing  over  from  Africa  at  a  place  which  is  called 
Ceuta,  invaded  all  Spain.  Then  after  ten  years,  coming  with 
their  wives  and  children,  they  invaded  as  if  to  settle  in 
Aquitania,  a  province  of  Gaul.  Charles  ^  had  at  that  time  a 
dispute  with  Eudo,  prince  of  Aquitania.  But  they  came  to 
an  agreement  and  fought  with  perfect  harmony  against  the 
Saracens.  For  the  Franks  fell  upon  them^  and  slew  three 
hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand  of  them;  but  on  the  side 
of  the  Franks  only  fifteen  hundred  fell.  Eudo  with  his  men 
broke  into  their  camp  and  slew  many  and  laid  waste  all. 

Ch.  47.  At  the  same  time  [A.  D.  717],  the  same  people  of 
the  Saracens  with  an  immense  army  came  and  encompassed 
Constantinople  and  for  three  years  besieged  it  until,  when 
the  people  had  called  upon  God  with  great  earnestness,  many 
of  the  enemy  perished  from  hunger  and  cold  and  by  war  and 
pestilence  and  so  wearied  out  they  abandoned  the  siege. 
When  they  had  left  they  carried  on  war  against  the  people  of 
the  Bulgarians  who  were  beyond  the  Danube,  but,  vanquished 
by  them  also,  they  fled  back  to  their  ships.  But  when  they 
had  put  out  to  the  deep  sea,  a  sudden  storm  fell  upon  them 
and  many  were  drowned  and  their  vessels  were  destroyed. 
But  in  Constantinople  three  hundred  thousand  men  died  of 
the  pestilence. 

Ch.  48.  Now  when  Liutprand  heard  that  the  Saracens, 
when  Sardinia  had  been  laid  waste,  had  also  polluted  those 
places  where  the  bones  of  the  holy  bishop  Augustine,  on  ac- 
count of  the  devastation  of  the  barbarians,  had  formerly  been 
transported  and  solemnly  buried,  he  sent  thither  and  when  he 
had  given  a  large  sum  obtained  them  and  transported  them  to 
the  city  of  Pavia,  where  he  buried  them  with  the  honor  due  so 
great  a  father.^  In  these  days  the  city  of  Narnia  was  con- 
quered by  the  Lombards. 

1  Charles  Martel.  2  a.  D.  732,  Battle  of  Tours  and  Poitiers. 

3  The  shrine  of  later  construction  may  still  be  seen  in  the  Cathedral  of  Pavia. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  the  genuine  relics  of  St.  Augustine  are  here. 


66o    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 


§107.    The  Monothelete  Controversy  and  the  Sixth 
General  Council,  Constantinpole  A.  D.  681 

The  Monothelete  controversy  was  the  natural  outcome  of 
the  earlier  Christological  controversies.  With  the  assertion 
of  the  two  complete  and  persisting  natures  of  Christ,  the  ques- 
tion must  sooner  or  later  arise  as  to  whether  there  was  one  will 
or  two  in  Christ.  If  there  were  two  wills,  it  seemed  to  lead 
back  to  Nestorianism ;  if  there  was  but  one,  either  the  hu- 
manity was  incomplete  or  the  position  led  to  virtual  monophy- 
sitism.  But  political  causes  played  even  a  greater  part  than 
the  theological  dialectic.  The  Emperor  Heraclius,  in  attempt- 
ing to  win  back  the  Monophysite  churches,  on  account  of  the 
war  with  Persia  and  later  on  account  of  the  advancing  Mos- 
lems, proposed  that  a  union  should  be  effected  on  the  basis  of 
a  formula  which  asserted  that  there  was  but  one  will  in  the 
God-man.  This  had  been  suggested  to  him  in  622  by 
Sergius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople  [Hefele,  §§  291,  295]. 
In  633  Cyrus  of  Phasis,  since  630  patriarch  of  Alexandria, 
brought  about  a  union  between  the  Orthodox  Church  and  the 
Egyptian  Monophysites  on  the  basis  of  a  Monothelete  for- 
mula, i.  e.,  a  statement  that  there  was  but  one  will  or  energy 
in  Christ.  At  once  a  violent  controversy  broke  out.  The 
formula  was  supported  by  Honorius  of  Rome,  but  attacked 
by  Sophronius,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  and  after  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem  in  638,  by  the  monk  Maximus  Confessor.  In  638 
Heraclius  tried  to  end  the  controversy  by  an  Ecthesis  [Hefele^ 
§  299],  and  Constans  II  (641-668)  attempted  the  same  in  648, 
by  his  Typos.  But  at  the  Lateran  Council  of  649,  under  Martin 
I,  Monotheletism  as  well  as  the  Ecthesis  and  Typos  were  con- 
demned. For  this  Martin  was  ultimately  banished,  dying  in 
misery,  654,  in  the  Chersonesus,  and  Maximus,  after  a  long, 
cruel  imprisonment,  and  horrible  torture  and  mutilation,  died 
in  exile,  662.  But  Constantius  Pogonatus  (668-685),  the  suc- 
cessor of  Constans  II,  determined  to  settle  the  matter  by  a 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY    66i 

general  council.  Pope  Agatho  (678-682)  thereupon  held  a 
great  council  at  Rome,  679,  at  which  it  was  decided  to  insist 
at  the  coming  general  council  upon  the  strictest  maintenance 
of  the  decisions  of  the  Roman  Council  of  649.  On  this  basis 
Agatho  dictated  the  formula  which  was  accepted  by  the  Coun- 
cil of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  681,  which  sent  its.proceedings  and 
conclusions  to  the  Pope  to  be  approved.  Along  with  them  was 
an  express  condemnation  of  Honorius.  Leo  II  (682-683), 
Agatho's  successor,  approved  the  council  with  special  mention 
of  Honorius  as  condemned  for  his  heresy. 

(a)  Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  Formula  of  Union,  A.  D.  633, 
Hahn,  §  232. 

The  author  of  this  formula,  known  also  as  Cyrus  of  Phasis,  under 
which  name  he  was  condemned  at  Constantinople,  A.  D.  680,  attempted 
to  win  over  the  Monophysites  in  Alexandria  and  met  with  great  suc- 
cess on  account  of  his  formula  of  union.  The  first  five  anathemas, 
the  form  in  which  the  formula  is  composed,  are  clearly  based  upon  the 
first  four  councils.  The  sixth  is  slightly  different;  and  the  seventh,  the 
most  important,  is  clearly  tending  toward  Monotheletism.  The  doc- 
ument's to  be  found  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Sixth  General  Council  in 
Mansi,  and  also  in  Hardouin.  For  a  synopsis,  see  Hefele,  §  293,  who 
is  most  valuable  for  the  whole  controversy. 

6.  If  any  one  does  not  confess  the  one  Christ,  the  one 
Son,  to  be  of  two  natures,  that  is,  divinity  and  humanity, 
one  nature  become  flesh ^  of  God  the  Word,  according  to  the 
holy  Cyril,  unmixed,  unchanged,  unchangeable,  that  is  to  say, 
one  synthetic  hypostasis,  who  is  the  same,  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  being  one  of  the  holy  homoousian  Triad,  let  such  an 
one  be  anathema. 

7.  If  any  one,  saying  that  our  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  to 
be  regarded  in  two  natures,  does  not  confess  that  He  is  one 
of  the  Holy  Triad,  God  the  Word,  eternally  begotten  of  the 
Father,  in  the  last  times  of  the  world  made  flesh  and  born  of 
our  all-holy  and  spotless  lady,  the  Theotokos  and  ever-virgin 

iNote  that  this  is  not  "the  one  nature  of  the  Word  of  God  become  flesh," 
the  formula  most  commonly  employed  by  Cyril,  and  to  be  distinguished  from 
this,  though  Cyril  sometimes  appears  to  use  the  two  contrary  to  his  own  dis- 
tinction. 


662    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Mary;  but  is  this  and  another  and  not  one  and  the  same, 
according  to  the  most  wise  Cyril,  perfect  in  deity  and  the 
same  perfect  in  humanity,  and  accordingly  only  to  be  thought 
of  as  in  two  natures;  the  same  suffering  and  not  suffering, 
according  to  one  or  the  other  nature,  as  the  same  holy  Cyril 
said,  suffering  as  a  man  in  the  flesh,  inasmuch  as  he  was  a 
man,  remaining  as  God  without  suffering  in  the  sufferings  of 
His  own  flesh;  and  the  one  and  the  same  Christ  energizing 
the  divine  and  the  human  things  with  the  one  theandric 
energy,^  according  to  the  holy  Dionysius;  distinguishing  only 
in  thought  those  things  from  which  the  union  has  taken  place, 
and  viewing  these  in  the  mind  as  remaining  unchanged,  un- 
alterable, and  unmixed  after  their  union  according  to  nature 
and  hypostasis;  and  recognizing  in  these  without  division  or 
separation  the  one  and  the  same  Christ  and  Son,  inasmuch  as 
he  regards  in  his  mind  two  as  brought  together  to  each  other 
without  commingling,  making  the  theory  of  them  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  but  not  by  a  lying  imagination  and  vain  combina- 
tions of  the  mind;  but  in  nowise  separating  them,  since  now 
the  division  into  two  has  been  destroyed  on  account  of  the 
indescribable  and  incomprehensible  union;  saying  with  the 
holy  Athanasius:  for  there  is  now  flesh  and  again  the  flesh  of 
God  the  Word,  now  flesh  animated  and  intelligent,  and  again 
the  flesh  of  the  animated  and  intelligent  God  the  Word;  but 
should  under  such  expressions  understand  a  distinction  into 
parts,  let  such  an  one  be  anathema. 

(b)  Constans  II,  Typos,  A.  D.  648,  Mansi,  X,  1029.  Cf. 
Kirch,  nn.  972/. 

The  attempt  to  end  the  controversy  by  returning  to  the  condition 
of  things  before  the  controversy  broke  out,  an  entirely  futile  undertak- 
ing. The  question  having  been  raised  had  to  be  discussed  and  settled 
by  rational  processes.     See  Hefele,  §  306. 

Since  it  is  our  custom  to  do  everything  and  to  consider 
everything  which  can  serve  the  welfare  of  the  Christian  State, 

^The  phrase  of  Dionysius  was  not  "one  theandric  energy"  but  "a  new 
theandric  energy." 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY   663 

and  especially  what  concerns  our  true  faith,  by  which  we  be- 
lieve all  our  happiness  is  brought  about,  we  perceive  that 
our  orthodox  people  are  greatly  disturbed,  because  some 
in  respect  to  the  Economy^  of  our  great  God  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ  assert  that  there  is  only  one  will,  and  that 
one  and  the  same  affects  both  the  divine  and  human  deeds; 
but  others  teach  two  wills  and  two  operations  in  the  same  dis- 
pensation of  the  incarnate  Word.  The  former  defend  their 
views  by  asserting  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  only  one 
person  in  two  natures,  and  therefore  without  confusion  or 
separation,  working  and  willing  as  well  the  divine  as  the  human 
deeds.  The  others  say  that  because  in  one  and  the  same  per- 
son two  natures  are  joined  without  any  separation,  so  their 
differences  from  each  other  remain,  and  according  to  the  char- 
acter of  each  nature  one  and  the  same  Christ  works  as  well 
the  divine  as  the  human;  and  from  this  our  Christian  State 
has  been  brought  to  much  dissension  and  confusion,  so  that 
differing  from  one  another  they  do  not  agree,  and  from  this 
the  State  must  in  many  ways  needs  suffer. 

We  believe  that,  under  God's  guidance,  we  must  extinguish 
the  flames  enkindled  by  discord,  and  we  ought  not  to  permit 
them  further  to  destroy  human  souls.  We  decree,  therefore, 
that  our  subjects  who  hold  our  immaculate  and  orthodox 
Christian  faith,  and  who  are  of  the  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  shall  from  the  present  moment  on  have  no  longer 
any  permission  to  raise  any  sort  of  dispute  and  quarrel  or 
strife  with  one  another  over  the  one  will  and  energy,  or  over 
two  wills  and  two  energies.  We  order  that  this  is  not  in  any 
way  to  take  anything  from  the  pious  teaching,  which  the  holy 
and  approved  Fathers  have  taught  concerning  the  incarna- 
tion of  God  the  Word,  but  with  the  purpose  that  all  further 
strife  in  regard  to  the  aforesaid  questions  cease,  and  in  this 
matter  we  follow  and  hold  as  sufficient  only  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures and  the  tradition  of  the  five  holy  general  councils  and  the 
simple  statements  and  unquestioned  usage  and  expressions  of 

^7.  e.,  the  incarnation,  term  so  used  constantly  in  Greek  theology. 


664    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

the  approved  Fathers  (of  which  the  dogmas,  rules,  and  laws 
of  God's  holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  consists),  with- 
out adding  to  or  taking  from  them  anything,  or  without  ex- 
plaining them  against  their  proper  meaning,  but  everywhere 
shall  be  preserved  the  former  customs,  as  before  the  disputes 
broke  out,  as  if  no  such  dispute  had  existed.  As  to  those 
who  have  hitherto  taught  one  will  and  one  energy  or 
two  wills  and  two  energies,  there  shall  be  no  accusation  on 
this  account;  excepting  only  those  who  have  been  cast  forth 
as  heretics,  together  with  their  impious  doctrines  and  writ- 
ings, by  the  five  holy  universal  councils  and  other  approved 
orthodox  Fathers.  But  to  complete  the  unity  and  fellowship 
of  the  churches  of  God,  and  that  there  remain  no  further  op- 
portunity or  occasion  to  those  who  are  eager  for  endless  dis- 
pute, we  order  that  the  document,^  which  for  a  long  time  has 
been  posted  up  in  the  narthex  of  the  most  holy  principal 
church  of  this  our  God-preserved  royal  city,  and  which 
touches  upon  the  points  in  dispute,  shall  be  taken  down. 
Whoever  dares  to  transgress  this  command  is  subject  before 
all  to  the  fearful  judgment  of  Almighty  God,  and  then  also 
will  be  liable  to  the  punishment  for  such  as  despise  the  imperial 
commands.  If  he  be  a  bishop  or  clergyman,  he  will  altogether 
be  deposed  from  his  priesthood  or  clerical  order;  if  a  monk, 
excommunicated  and  driven  out  of  his  residence;  if  a  civil  or 
military  officer,  he  shall  lose  his  rank  and  office;  if  a  private 
citizen,  he  shall,  if  noble,  be  punished  pecuniarily,  if  of  lower 
rank,  be  subjected  to  corporal  punishment  and  perpetual  exile. 

(c)  Council  of  Rome,  A.  D.  649,  Canons,  Mansi,  X,  11 50. 
Cf.  Denziger,  nn.  254/. 

Condemnation  of  Monotheletism,  the  Edhesis,  and  the  Typos,  by 
Martin  I. 

Text  of  canons  or  anathematisms  and  abstract  of  proceedings  in 
Hefele,  §  307. 

Canon  18.  If  any  one  does  not,  according  to  the  holy 
Fathers,  and  in  company  with  us,  reject  and  anathematize 

1  The  Ecthesis. 


in  their  thought,  or 
operation  of  the  de 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY   665 

with  mind  and  mouth  all  those  whom  as  most  wicked  heretics 
the  holy  Catholic  and  ApostoHc  Church  of  God,  that  is,  the 
five  universal  synods  and  likewise  all  approved  Fathers  of  the 
Church,  rejects  and  anathematizes,  with  all  their  impious 
writings  even  to  each  point,  that  is,  SabelUus,  etc.  .  .  .  and 
justly  with  these,  as  like  them  and  in  equal  error  .  .  .  Cyrus 
of  Alexandria,  Sergius  of  Constantinople,  and  his  successors 
Pyrrhus  and  Paul,  persisting  in  their  pride,  and  all  their 
impious  writings,  a^i  tho  se  who  to  the  end  agreed  with  them 
lo  so  i  ^gree,  that  there  is  one  will  and  one 
:y  and  manhood  of  Christ;  and  in  addi- 
tion to  these  the  ni^st  (mpaiious  Ecthesis,  which,  by  the  per- 
suasion of  the  same  Serfius,  dwas  put  forth  by  the  former  Em- 
peror Heraclius  against)  the c^  orthodox  faith,  defining,  by  way 
of  adjustment,  one  will  iil  Christ  our  God,  and  one  operation 
to  be  venerated;  also  all  those  things  which  were  impiously 
written  or  done  by  them;  and  those  who  received  it,  or  any 
of  those  things  which  were  written  or  done  for  it;  and  along 
with  these,  furthermore,  the  wicked  Typos,  which,  on  the  per- 
suasion of  the  aforesaid  Paul,  was  recently  issued  by  our  most 
serene  prince  Constans  against  the  Catholic  Church,  inasmuch 
as  it  equally  denies  and  excludes  from  discussion  the  two 
natural  wills  and  operations,  a  divine  and  a  human,  which 
are  piously  taught  by  the  holy  Fathers  to  be  in  Christ, 
our  God,  and  also  our  Saviour,  and  also  the  one  will  and 
operation,  which  by  the  heretics  is  impiously  venerated  in 
Him,  and  therefore  declaring  that  with  the  holy  Fathers 
also  the  wicked  heretics  are  unjustly  freed  from  all  rebuke 
and  condemnation,  to  the  destruction  of  the  definitions  of 
the  CathoHc  Church  and  its  rule  of  faith  ...  let  him  be 
condemned. 

(d)  Sixth  General  Council,  Constantinople,  A.  D.  681, 
Definition  of  Faith.    Mansi,  XI,  636  Jf. 

The  concluding,  more  strictly  dogmatic  portion  of  this  symbol  is  to 
be  found  in  Greek  in  Hahn,  §  150,  and  in  Latin  and  Greek  in  Denziger, 
nn.  289  /.     See  also  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV. 


666    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

The  holy,  great,  and  ecumenical  synod  assembled  by  the 
grace  of  God  and  the  religious  decree  of  the  most  religious, 
faithful,  and  mighty  Emperor  Constantine,  in  this  God-pre- 
served and  royal  city  of  Constantinople,  New  Rome,  in  the  hall 
of  the  imperial  palace  called  TruUus,  has  decreed  as  follows : 

The  only  begotten  Son  and  Word  of  God  the  Father,  who 
was  made  man,  like  unto  us  in  all  things,  without  sin,  Christ 
our  true  God,  has  declared  expressly  iri  the  words  of  the  Gos- 
pel: ''I  am  the  light  of  the  world;  he^^-i  tixt  iolloweth  Me  shall 
not  walk  in  darkness,  but  shall  hav-^e  thelight  of  hfe"  [John 
8:12];  and  again:  "  My  peace  I  leq_i3.ve  wth  you,  My  peace  I 
give  unto  you"  [John  14:  27].  Ovt'-irmos  gracious  Emperor, 
the  champion  of  orthodoxy  and  t^PP^^^it  of  evil  doctrine, 
being  reverentially  led  by  this  diovipJy  uttered  doctrine  of 
peace,  and  having  assembled  this  our  holy  and  eciunenical 
synod,  has  united  the  judgment  of  the  whole  Church.  Where- 
fore this  our  holy  and  ecumenical  synod,  having  driven  away 
the  impious  error  which  has  prevailed  for  a  certain  time  until 
now,  and  following  closely  the  straight  path  of  the  holy  and 
approved  Fathers,  has  piously  given  its  assent  to  the  five  holy 
and  ecumenical  synods — that  is  to  say,  to  that  of  the  three 
hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers  assembled  at  Nicaea 
against  the  insane  Arius;  and  the  next  at  Constantinople  of 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty  God-inspired  men  against  Mace- 
donius,  the  adversary  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  impious  Apolli- 
naris;  and  also  the  first  at  Ephesus  of  two  hundred  venerable 
men  assembled  against  Nestorius,  the  Judaizer;  and  that  in 
Chalcedon  of  six  hundred  and  thirty  God-inspired  Fathers 
against  Eutyches  and  Dioscurus,  hated  of  God;  and  in  addi- 
tion to  these  the  last,  that  is  the  fifth,  holy  synod  assembled  in 
this  place  against  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  Origen,  Didymus, 
and  Evagrius,  and  the  writings  of  Theodoret  against  the 
twelve  chapters  of  the  celebrated  Cyril,  and  the  epistle  which 
was  said  to  have  been  written  by  Ibas  to  Maris  the  Persian — 
without  alteration  this  synod  renews  in  all  points  the  ancient 
decrees  of  religion,  chasing  away  the  impious  doctrines  of 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY    667 

irreligion.  And  this  our  holy  and  ecumenical  synod,  inspired 
of  God,  has  set  its  seal  to  the  creed  of  the  three  hundred  and 
eighteen  Fathers,  and  again  rehgiously  confirmed  by  the  one 
hundred  and  fifty,  which  also  the  other  holy  synods  gladly 
received  and  ratified  for  the  removal  of  every  soul-destroying 
heresy. 

Then  follow: 

The  Nicene  Creed  of  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  holy  Fathers. 
We  believe,  etc. 

The  Creed  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  holy  Fathers  assembled  at 
Constantinople.     We  believe,  etc.,  but  without  the  filioque. 

The  holy  and  ecumenical  synod  further  says  that  this  pious 
and  orthodox  creed  of  the  divine  grace  would  be  sufficient  for 
the  full  knowledge  and  confirmation  of  the  orthodox  faith. 
But  as  the  author  of  evil,  who  in  the  beginning  availed  him- 
self of  the  aid  of  the  serpent,  and  by  it  brought  the  poison  of 
death  upon  the  human  race,  has  not  desisted,  but  in  like  manner 
now,  having  found  suitable  instruments  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  will — that  is  to  say,  Theodorus,  who  was  bishop  of 
Pharan;  Sergius,  Pyrrhus,  Paul  and  Peter,  who  were  prelates 
of  this  royal  city;  and  also  Honorius,  who  was  pope  of  Old 
Rome;  Cyrus,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  Marcarius,  lately  bishop 
of  Antioch,  and  Stephen,  his  disciple — has  not  ceased  with  their 
aid  to  raise  up  for  the  whole  Church  the  stumbhng-blocks  of 
one  will  and  operation  in  the  two  natures  of  Christ,  our  true 
God,  one  of  the  holy  Trinity;  thus  disseminating  in  novel 
terms  among  orthodox  people  a  heresy  similar  to  the  mad  and 
wicked  doctrine  of  the  impious  Apollinaris,  Severus,  and 
Themistius,  and  endeavoring  craftily  to  destroy  the  perfection 
of  the  incarnation  of  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  our  God, 
by  blasphemously  representing  His  flesh  as  endowed  with  a 
rational  soul  devoid  of  will  and  operation.  Christ,  therefore, 
our  God,  has  raised  up  our  faithful  Emperor,  a  new  David, 
having  found  him  a  man  after  His  own  heart,  who,  as  it  is 
written,  has  not  suffered  his  eyes  to  sleep  nor  his  eyehds  to 
slumber   [cf.  Psalm    132  : 4]  until  he  had  found  a  perfect 


668    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

declaration  of  orthodoxy  by  this  our  God-assembled  and  holy 
synod;  for  according  to  the  sentence  spoken  of  God:  "Where 
two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  My  name,  there  am  I  in 
the  midst  of  them  "  [Matt.  i8  :  20],  the  present^  holy  and  ecu- 
menical synod,  faithfully  receiving  and  saluting  with  uplifted 
hands  also  the  suggestion  which  by  the  most  holy  and  blessed 
Pope  Agatho,  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  was  sent  to  our  most  pious 
and  faithful  Emperor  Constantine,  which  rejected  by  name 
those  who  taught  or  preached  one  will  and  operation  in  the 
dispensation  of  the  incarnation  of  Christ  ^  our  very  God,  has 
hkewise  adopted  that  other  synodal  suggestion  which  was  sent 
by  the  council  held  under  the  same  most  holy  Pope,  composed 
of  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  bishops  beloved  of  God,^  to 
his  God-instructed  tranquillity  [i.  e.,  the  Emperor],  as  con- 
sonant to  the  holy  Council  of  Chalcedon  and  the  Tome  of  the 
most  holy  and  blessed  Leo,  Pope  of  the  same  Old  Rome,  which 
was  directed  to  the  holy  Flavian,  which  also  the  council 
called  the  pillar  of  a  right  faith;  and  also  agrees  with  the 
synodical  letters  written  by  the  blessed  Cyril  against  the 
impious  Nestorius  and  addressed  to  the  Oriental  bishops. 

Following^  the  five  holy  and  ecumenical  synods  and  the 
most  holy  and  approved  Fathers,  with  one  voice  defining  that 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  must  be  confessed  to  be  our  very  God, 
one  of  the  holy  and  consubstantial  and  life-giving  Trinity, 
perfect  in  deity  and  the  same  perfect  in  humanity,  truly  God 
and  truly  man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and  body;  consubstantial 
with  His  Father  as  to  His  godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us 
as  to  His  manhood;  in  all  things  hke  unto  us,  without  sin 
[Heb.  4  :  15];  begotten  of  His  Father  before  the  ages  accord- 
ing to  His  godhead,  but  in  these  last  days  for  us  men  and  for 
our  salvation  begotten  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  strictly  and  in  truth  Theotokos,  according  to  the  flesh; 
one  and  the  same  Christ,  Son,  Lord,  Only  begotten,  in  two 

1  From  here  text  in  Denziger.  ^ Latin  reads:  07ir  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

2  For  this  council,  see  Hefele,  §  314. 

*  From  here  the  text  may  be  found  also  in  Hahn,  §  150. 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY    669 

natures  unconfusedly,  unchangeably,  inseparably,  indivisibly 
to  be  recognized;  the  peculiarities  of  neither  nature  lost 
by  the  union,  but  rather  the  properties  of  each  nature  pre- 
served, concurring  in  one  person,^  and  in  one  subsistence,^ 
not  parted  or  divided  into  two  persons,  but  one  and  the  same 
only  begotten  Son,  the  Word  of  God,^  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
according  as  the  prophets  of  old  have  taught,  and  as  Jesus 
Christ  Himself  hath  taught,  and  the  creed  of  the  holy  Fathers 
hath  delivered  to  us;  ^  we  likewise  declare  that  in  Him  are 
two  natural  wills  or  wilHngs  and  two  natural  operations  indi- 
visibly, unchangeably,  inseparably,  unconfusedly,  according 
to  the  teaching  of  the  holy  Fathers.  And  these  two  natural 
wills  are  not  contrary  one  to  the  other  (which  God  forbid),  as 
the  impious  heretics  say,  but  His  human  will  follows,  not  as 
resisting  or  reluctant,  but  rather  therefore  as  subject  to  His 
divine  and  omnipotent  will.  For  it  was  right  that  the  will 
of  the  flesh  should  be  moved,  but  be  subject  to  the  divine  will, 
according  to  the  most  wise  Athanasius.  For  as  His  flesh  is 
called  and  is  the  flesh  of  God  the  Word,  so  also  the  natural 
will  of  His  flesh  is  called  and  is  the  proper  will  of  God  the  Word, 
as  He  Himself  says:  *'I  came  down  from  heaven,  not  to  do 
Mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  the  Father  which  sent  Me,"  [John 
6  :  38],  wherein  he  calls  His  own  will  the  will  of  the  flesh, 
inasmuch  as  His  flesh  was  also  His  own.  For  as  His  most 
holy  and  immaculately  animated  flesh  was  not  destroyed  be- 
cause it  was  deified  [OecoOelcra]^  but  continued  in  its  own  state 
and  nature,  so  also  His  human  will,  although  deified,  was  not 
taken  away,  but  rather  was  preserved  according  to  the  say- 
ing of  Gregory  the  Theologian i^  "His  will,  namely  that  of  the 
Saviour,  is  not  contrary  to  God,  but  altogether  deified." 

We  glorify  two  natural  operations,  indivisibly,  unchange- 
ably, inseparably,  unconfusedly,  in  the  same  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  our  true  God,  that  is  to  say,  a  divine  operation  and  a 

1  Prosopon,  and  so  throughout.  ^  Hypostasis,  and  so  throughout. 

3  Latin:  God  the  Word. 

*  The  preceding  is  but  a  recapitulation  of  Chalcedon;  see  above,  §  90. 
*/.  e.,  Gregory  Nazianzus. 


670    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

human  operation,  according  to  the  divine  preacher  Leo,  who 
most  distinctly  says  as  follows:  ''For  each  form  does  in  com- 
munion with  the  other  what  pertains  to  it,  namely  the  Word 
doing  what  pertains  to  the  Word,  and  the  flesh  what  pertains 
to  the  flesh.  "^  For  we  will  not  admit  one  natural  operation 
of  God  and  of  the  creature,  that  we  may  not  exalt  into  the 
divine  essence  what  is  created,  nor  will  we  bring  down  the 
glory  of  the  divine  nature  to  the  place  suited  for  those  things 
which  have  been  made.  We  recognize  the  miracles  and  the 
sufferings  as  of  one  and  the  same  person,  but  of  one  or  of  the 
other  nature  of  which  He  is,  and  in  which  He  has  His  exist- 
ence, as  the  admirable  Cyril  said.  Preserving  in  all  respects, 
therefore,  the  unconfusedness  and  indivisibiHty,  we  express 
all  in  brief  phrase:  Believing  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  one 
of  the  Trinity  also  after  the  incarnation,  is  our  true  God,  we 
say  that  His  two  natures  shone  forth  in  His  one  subsistence 
[hypostasis],  in  which  were  both  the  miracles  and  the  suffering 
throughout  the  whole  incarnate  life,^  not  in  appearance  merely 
but  in  reality,  the  difference  as  to  nature  being  recognized 
in  one  and  the  same  subsistence;  for,  although  joined  together, 
each  nature  wills  and  operates  the  things  proper  to  it.^  For 
this  reason  we  glorify  two  natural^  wills  and  operations  con- 
curring most  fitly  in  Him  for  the  salvation  of  the  human  race. 
Since  these  things  have  been  formulated  by  us  with  all 
diligence  and  care,  we  decree  that  to  no  one  shall  it  be  per- 
mitted to  bring  forward  or  write  or  to  compose  or  to  think 
or  to  teach  otherwise.  Whosoever  shall  presume  to  compose 
a  different  faith  or  to  propose,  or  to  teach,  or  to  hand  to  those 
wishing  to  be  converted  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  from 
the  heathen  or  the  Jews  or  from  any  heresy  any  different  sym- 
bol, or  to  introduce  a  new  mode  of  expression  to  subvert 

^  Leo,  Ep.  ad  Flavianum,  ch.  4:  Agit  enim  utraque  forma  cum  alterius  com- 
munione  quod  proprium  est,  Verbo  scilicet  operante  quod  Verbi  est,  et  carne 
exsequente  quod  carnis  est;  unum  horum  coruscat  miraculis,  aliud  succumbit 
iniuriis;  v.  supra,  §  90,  b. 

2  Greek:   economic  life.  ^  Latin  adds:  indivisibly  and  unconfusedly. 

*  Here,  as  elsewhere,  "natural  will"  means  such  a  will  as  belongs  to  a  nature, 
divine  or  human. 


THE  MONOTHELETE  CONTROVERSY   671 

these  things  which  have  now  been  determined  by  us,  all  these, 
a  they  be  bishops  or  clergy,  shall  be  deposed,  the  bishops  from 
the  episcopate,  the  clergy  from  the  clerical  office;  but  if  they 
be  monks  or  laymen,  they  shall  be  anathematized. 

(e)  Council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  681,  Sessio  XIII. 
Mansi,  XI,  1050.     Cf.  Mirbt,  n.  188. 

The  condemnation  of  the  Monotheletes,  including  Honorius  of  Rome. 

The  condemnation  of  Honorius  has  become  a  cause  celebre,  espe- 
cially in  connection  with  the  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility.  It  should 
be  observed,  however,  that  the  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility,  as  de- 
fined at  the  Vatican  Council,  A.  D.  1870  {cf.  Mirbt,  n.  509),  requires 
that  only  when  the  Pope  speaks  ex  cathedra  is  he  infallible,  and  it 
has  not  been  shown  that  any  opinion  whatever  held  by  Honorius  was 
an  ex  cathedra  definition  of  faith  and  morals  according  to  the  Vatican 
Council.  The  matter  is  therefore  a  mere  question  of  fact  and  may  be 
treated  apart  from  the  Vatican  dogma.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind, 
further,  that  the  Sixth  General  Council  was  approved  by  Pope  Leo  II, 
A.  D.  682  {cf.  Mirbt,  n.  189),  who  included  Honorius  by  name  among 
those  whose  condemnation  was  approved.  Tha,t  he  did  so  approve 
it  is  also  stated  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis  {cf.  Mirbt,  n.  190),  and 
according  to  the  Liber  Diurnus,  the  official  book  of  formulae  used  in 
the  papal  business,  the  Pope  took  an  oath  recognizing  among  others 
the  Sixth  General  Council,  and  condemning  Honorius  among  other 
heretics  {cf.  Mirbt,  n.  191).  That  Honorius  was  actually  a  heretic  is 
still  another  matter;  for  it  seems  not  at  all  unlikely  that  he  misunder- 
stood the  point  at  issue  and  his  language  is  quite  unscientific.  The 
text  of  the  letters  of  Honorius  may  be  found  in  Kirch,  nn.  949-965,  and 
in  Hefele  in  a  translation,  §§  296,  298.  On  the  condemnation  of  Ho- 
norius, see  Hefele,  §  324. 

The  holy  council  said:  After  we  had  reconsidered,  accord- 
ing to  our  promise  made  to  your  highness,^  the  doctrinal  let- 
ter written  by  Sergius,  at  one  time  patriarch  of  this  royal  God- 
preserved  city,  to  Cyrus,  who  was  then  bishop  of  Phasis, 
and  to  Honorius,  sometime  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  as  well  as  the 
letter  of  the  latter  to  the  same  Sergius,  and  finding  that  the 
documents  are  quite  foreign  to  the  apostolic  dogmas,  to  the 
definitions  of  the  holy  councils,  and  to  all  the  approved  Fathers, 
and  that  they  follow  the  false  teachings  of  the  heretics,  we 
entirely  reject  them,  and  execrate  them  as  hurtful  to  the  soul. 
^  The  Emperor  to  whom  the  report  is  made. 


672    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

But  the  names  of  those  men  whom  we  execrate  must  also  be 
thrust  forth  from  the  holy  Church  of  God,  namely,  that  of 
Sergius,  sometime  bishop  of  this  God-preserved  royal  city, 
who  was  the  first  to  write  on  this  impious  doctrine;  also  that 
of  Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  of  Pyrrhus,  Paul,  and  Peter,  who  died 
bishops  of  this  God-preserved  city,  and  were  like-minded  with 
them;  and  that  of  Theodore,  sometime  bishop  of  Pharan,  all 
of  whom  the  most  holy  and  thrice-blessed  Agatho,  Pope  of 
Old  Rome,  in  his  suggestion  to  our  most  pious  and  God-pre- 
served lord  and  mighty  Emperor,  rejected  because  they  were 
minded  contrary  to  our  orthodox  faith,  all  of  whom  we  de- 
clare are  subject  to  anathema.  And  with  these  we  decree 
that  there  shall  be  expelled  from  the  holy  Church  of  God  and 
anathematized  Honorius,  who  was  Pope  of  Old  Rome,  be- 
cause of  what  we  found  written  by  him  to  Sergius,  that  in  all 
respects  he  followed  his  view  and  confirmed  his  impious  doc- 
trine. 

We  have  also  examined  the  synodal  letter  ^  of  Sophronius, 
of  holy  memory,  sometime  patriarch  of  the  holy  city  of  our 
God,  Jerusalem,  and  have  found  it  in  accordance  with  the 
true  faith  and  with  apostolic  teachings,  and  with  the  teach- 
ings of  the  holy  and  approved  Fathers.  Therefore,  we  have 
received  it  as  orthodox  and  salutary  to  the  holy  and  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church,  and  have  decreed  that  it  is  right  that 
his  name  be  inserted  in  the  diptychs  of  the  holy  churches. 

§  108.    Rome,  Constantinople,  and  the  Lombard  State 
Church  in  the  Seventh  Century 

The  Sixth  General  Council  was  the  last  great  diplomatic 
triumph  of  Rome  in  the  East  in  matters  of  faith,  though  two 
centuries  after,  in  the  matter  of  Photius,  Rome  played  a  bril- 
liant part  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Eastern  Church,  Im- 
mediately after  the  council  of  681,  it  was  felt  that  the  West, 
of  which  the  Greeks  had  grown  very  jealous,  had  triumphed 
*  The  most  important  parts  of  this  are  to  be  found  in  Hahn,  §  233. 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  673 

over  the  East,  especially  as  several  of  the  leading  patriarchs 
had  been  condemned.  Monotheletism,  furthermore,  was  too 
strongly  intrenched  in  the  East  to  be  removed  by  a  single 
conciHar  action.  It  was  felt  necessary  to  take  action  to  con- 
firm the  results  of  Constantinople  in  681.  The  fifth  and 
sixth  general  councils  had  been  occupied  entirely  with  doc- 
trinal matters  and  had  not  issued  any  disciplinary  canons. 
A  new  council  might  be  gathered  to  complete  the  work  of  the 
Sixth  General  Council,  not  only  to  reaffirm  it,  but  in  connec- 
tion with  some  much-needed  legislation  to  retort  upon  the 
West  by  condemning  some  Roman  practices.  In  this  way 
the  Second  TruUan  Council,  or  Concilium  Quinisextum,  came 
about  in  692.  The  Roman  see,  in  the  meanwhile,  although  it 
had  triumphed  at  Constantinople  in  681,  did  not  enjoy  an 
independent  political  position  in  Italy.  It  was  still  under  the 
Roman  Emperor  at  Constantinople,  as  had  been  most  pain- 
fully perceived  in  the  treatment  of  Martin  I  by  Constans. 
Although  the  Pope  had  his  apocrisarius,  or  nuncio,  at  Con- 
stantinople, he  came  into  immediate  contact  with  the  exarch 
of  Ravenna,  the  Emperor's  representative  in  Italy.  In  Italy, 
furthermore,  the  Arian  heresy  long  persisted  among  the  Lom- 
bards, although  greater  toleration  was  shown  the  Catholic 
Church. 

Additional  source  material:  The  canons  of  the  Quinisext  Council 
may  be  found  complete  in  Percival,  Seven  Ecumenical  Councils,  PNF, 
ser.  II,  vol.  XIV. 

(a)  Concilium  Quinisextum,  A.  D.  692,  Canons.    Bruns, 

1,34/. 

This  council  was  commonly  regarded  as  the  continuation  of  the 
Sixth  General  Council,  and  has  been  received  in  the  East,  not  as  a 
separate  council,  but  as  a  part  of  the  sixth.  The  West  has  never  ac- 
cepted this  opinion  and  has  only  to  a  limited  extent  admitted  the  au- 
thority of  its  canons,  though  some  have  been  current  in  the  West  be- 
cause, like  much  conciliar  action,  they  were  re-enactments  of  older 
canons.  Occasionally  some  of  the  canons  have  been  cited  by  popes 
as  belonging  to  the  Sixth  Council.  The  canons  given  here  are,  for  the 
most  part,  those  which  were  in  some  point  in  opposition  to  the  Roman 
practice. 


674    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Canon  i .  Renewal  of  the  Condemnations  of  the  Sixth  Council. 
.  .  .  We,  by  divine  grace  at  the  beginning  of  our  decrees, 
define  that  the  faith  set  forth  by  the  God-chosen  Apostles, 
who  themselves  had  both  seen  the  Word  and  were  ministers 
of  the  Word,  shall  be  preserved  without  any  innovation,  un- 
changed and  inviolate.  Moreover  the  faith  of  the  three  hun- 
dred and  eighteen  holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  etc. 

[Here  follows  a  detailed  statement  of  the  first  five  general  councils.l 

Also  we  agree  to  guard  untouched  the  faith  of  the  Sixth 
Holy  Synod,  which  first  assembled  in  this  royal  city  in  the  time 
of  Constantine,  our  Emperor,  of  blessed  memory,  which  faith 
received  still  greater  confirmation  from  the  fact  that  the  pious 
Emperor  ratified  with  his  own  signet  what  was  written,  for 
the  security  of  every  future  age.  And  again  we  confess  that 
we  should  guard  the  faith  unaltered  and  openly  acknowledged ; 
that  in  the  Economy  of  the  incarnation  of  our  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  true  God,  there  are  two  natural  wills  or  volitions 
and  two  natural  operations;  and  have  condemned  by  a  just 
sentence  those  who  adulterated  the  true  doctrine  and  taught 
the  people  that  in  the  one  Lord,  our  God,  Jesus  Christ,  there  is 
but  one  will  and  operation,  that  is  to  say,  Theodore  of  Pharan, 
Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  Honorius  of  Rome,  Sergius,  Pyrrhus, 
Paul,  and  Peter,  who  were  bishops  of  this  God-preserved  city, 
Macarius,  who  was  bishop  of  Antioch,  Stephen  who  was  his 
disciple,  and  the  insane  Polychronius,  depriving  them  hence- 
forth of  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ  our  God.  .  .  . 

Canon  2.    On  the  Sources  of  Canon  Law. 

This  canon  opposed  Rome  in  two  respects:  it  accepted  eighty-five 
Apostolic  Canons,  whereas  Rome  received  but  fifty;  it  drew  up  a  list 
of  councils  and  of  Fathers  whose  writings  should  have  authority  as 
canons,  and  omitted  the  important  Western  councils,  except  Carthage, 
and  all  the  papal  decrees.  With  this  canon  should  be  compared  the 
decretal  of  Gelasius,  De  Libris  Recipiendis,  v.  supra,  §  92. 

It  has  also  seemed  good  to  this  holy  synod  that  the  eighty- 
five  canons  received  and  ratified  by  the  holy  and  blessed 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  675 

Fathers  before  us,  and  also  handed  down  to  us  in  the  name  of 
the  holy  and  glorious  Apostles,  should  from  this  time  forth 
remain  firm  and  unshaken  for  the  cure  of  souls  and  the  heal- 
ing of  disorders.  And  since  in  these  canons  we  are  bidden  to 
receive  the  Constitutions  of  the  Holy  Apostles  by  Clement, 
in  which,  in  old  time,  certain  spurious  matter  entirely  contrary 
to  piety  was  introduced  by  heterodox  persons  for  the  pol- 
luting of  the  Church,  which  obscures  to  us  the  elegance  and 
beauty  of  the  divine  decrees;  we,  therefore,  for  the  edification 
and  security  of  the  most  Christian  flock,  reject  properly  such 
constitutions;  by  no  means  admitting  the  offspring  of  hereti- 
cal error,  and  cleaving  to  the  pure  and  perfect  doctrine  of  the 
Apostles.  But  we  set  our  seal  likewise  upon  all  the  other 
holy  canons  set  forth  by  our  holy  and  blessed  Fathers,  that  is, 
by  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  God-fearing  Fathers 
assembled  at  Nicaea,  and  those  at  Ancyra;  further,  those  at 
Neo-Caesarea  and  at  Gangra,  and  besides  these  those  at  An- 
tioch  in  Syria  [A.  D.  341],  those  too  at  Laodicea  in  Phrygia, 
and  likewise  those  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty  assembled 
in  this  God-preserved  imperial  city  and  of  the  two  hundred, 
who  assembled  for  the  first  time  in  the  metropolis  of  the 
Ephesians,  and  of  the  six  hundred  and  thirty  holy  and  blessed 
Fathers  at  Chalcedon;  in  like  manner  those  of  Sardica  and 
those  of  Carthage;  those  also  who  assembled  in  this  God- 
preserved  imperial  city  under  Nectarius  [A.  D.  394],  and  under 
Theophilus,  archbishop  of  Alexandria;  likewise  too  the 
canons^  of  Dionysius,  formerly  archbishop  of  the  great  city 
of  Alexandria,  and  of  Peter,  archbishop  of  Alexandria,  and 
martyr;  of  Gregory  the  Wonder-worker,  archbishop  of  Neo- 
Caesarea;  of  Athanasius,  archbishop  of  Alexandria;  of  Basil, 
archbishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia;  of  Gregory,  bishop  of 
Nyssa;  of  Gregory  the  Theologian  ;2  of  Amphilochius  of 
Iconium;  of  Timothy,  archbishop  of  Alexandria;  of  the  first 
Theophilus,  archbishop  of  the  same  metropohs  of  Alexandria; 
of  Gennadius,  patriarch  of  the  God-preserved  imperial  city; 

^  Decretal  letters.  ^I.e.,  Gregory  Nazianzus. 


676    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

moreover  the  canons  set  forth  by  Cyprian,  archbishop  of  the 
country  of  the  Africans,  and  martyr,  and  by  the  synod  under 
him,^  which  have  been  kept  in  the  country  of  the  aforesaid 
bishops  and  only  according  to  the  custom  dehvered  down  to 
them.  And  that  no  one  be  allowed  to  transgress  the  aforesaid 
canons,  or  to  receive  other  canons  besides  them,supposititiously 
set  forth  by  some  who  have  attempted  to  make  a  traffic  of 
the  truth.  But  should  any  one  be  convicted  of  innovating 
upon  them,  or  attempting  to  overturn  any  of  the  aforemen- 
tioned canons,  he  shall  be  condemned  to  receive  the  penalty 
which  the  canon  imposes  and  so  to  be  cured  of  his  trans- 
gressions. 

Canon  13.     On  the  Marriage  of  the  Clergy, 

The  following  canon  permits  subdeacons  and  priests  if  married 
before  ordination  to  continue  to  live  in  marriage  relations  with  their 
wives.  But  they  are  not  allowed  to  marry  a  second  time  or  to  marry  a 
widow.  Neither  are  bishops  to  remain  married;  but  if  they  are  mar- 
ried when  elected,  their  wives  must  enter  a  monastery  at  a  distance. 
With  this  canon  should  be  compared  the  earlier  legislation  of  Nicaea,  v. 
supra,  §  78,  and  also  the  law  of  Justinian,  v.  supra,  §  94. 

Since  we  know  that  it  is  handed  down  in  the  canonical  dis- 
cipline in  the  Roman  Church  that  those  who  are  about  to  be 
deemed  worthy  of  ordination  to  the  diaconate  or  presbyterate 
should  promise  no  longer  to  live  maritally  with  their  wives, 
we,  pursuing  the  ancient  rule  of  apostolic  discipline  and  order, 
will  that  henceforth  the  lawful  marriage  of  men  in  holy  orders 
remain  firm,  by  no  means  dissolving  their  union  with  their 
wives,  nor  depriving  them  of  intercourse  with  each  other  at  a 
convenient  season.  .  .  .  Therefore,  if  any  one  shall  have 
dared,  contrary  to  the  Apostolic  Canons,  to  deprive  any  one 
in  holy  orders,  that  is,  any  presbyter,  deacon,  or  subdeacon, 
of  cohabitation  and  intercourse  with  his  lawful  wife,  let  him 
be  deposed;  likewise  also  if  any  presbyter  or  deacon,  on  pre- 
tence of  piety,  puts  away  his  wife,  let  him  be  excluded  from 
communion;  but  if  he  persists  let  him  be  deposed. 

^  Probably  that  of  256. 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  677 

Canon  36.     On  the  Rank  of  the  Patriarchal  Sees. 

Rome  always  rejected  the  claim  of  Constantinople  to  rank  as  second. 
C/.  Leo's  opinion,  v.  supra,  §  87. 

Renewing  the  enactments  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty 
Fathers  assembled  in  the  God-preserved  and  imperial  city, 
and  the  six  hundred  and  thirty  assembled  at  Chalcedon,  we 
decree  that  the  see  of  Constantinople  shall  enjoy  equal  priv- 
ilege with  the  see  of  Old  Rome,  and  in  ecclesiastical  matters 
shall  be  as  highly  regarded  as  that  is,  and  second  after  it. 
And  after  this  [Constantinople]  shall  be  ranked  the  see  of  the 
great  city  of  Alexandria,  and  after  that  the  see  of  Antioch, 
and  after  that  the  see  of  Jerusalem. 

Canon  37.     On  Bishops  of  Sees  among  Infidels, 

This  canon  is  cited  here,  though  not  entering  into  the  controversy 
between  the  East  and  the  West,  because  it  is  significant  of  the  changed 
position  of  the  Eastern  Church  at  this  time,  due  to  the  Moslem  and 
other  conquests.  The  Monophysite  bishops  in  Egypt  and  Syria  were 
not  molested  by  the  Moslems.  This  canon  marks  the  beginning  of 
the  practice  of  ordaining  bishops  in  partibus  infidelium. 

Since  at  different  times  there  have  been  invasions  of  the 
barbarians,  and  consequently  very  many  cities  have  come  into 
the  possession  of  the  infidels,  so  that  as  a  consequence  the 
prelate  of  a  city  may  not  be  able,  after  he  has  been  ordained, 
to  take  possession  of  his  see  and  to  be  settled  in  it  in  sacerdotal 
order,  and  so  to  perform  and  manage,  according  to  custom, 
the  ordinations  and  all  other  things  which  appertain  to  the 
bishop;  we,  preserving  the  honor  and  veneration  of  the  priest- 
hood, and  in  nowise  wishing  to  make  use  of  the  heathen 
injury  to  the  ruin  of  ecclesiastical  rights,  have  decreed  that 
they  who  have  been  thus  ordained,  and  for  the  aforesaid 
causes  have  not  settled  in  their  sees,  may  be  kept  from  any 
prejudice  from  this  thing,  so  that  they  may  canonically  per- 
form the  ordination  of  the  different  clerics  and  use  the  author- 
ity of  their  offices  according  to  proper  Hmits,  and  that  what- 
ever administration  proceeds  from  them  may  be  vaHd  and 


678    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

legitimate.  For  the  exercise  of  his  office  shall  not  be  circum- 
scribed by  reason  of  necessity,  when  the  exact  observance 
of  the  law  is  circumscribed. 

Canon  55.     On  Fasts  in  Lent. 

As  stated  in  the  canon,  this  enactment  is  aimed  at  the  Roman 
usage,  and  refers  to  the  64th  Apostolic  Canon,  which  Rome  rejected. 
For  the  ApostoHc  Canons,  see  ANF,  VII,  504. 

Since  we  have  learned  that  in  the  city  of  the  Romans,  in 
the  holy  fast  of  Lent,  they  fast  on  the  Sabbaths^  contrary  to 
the  traditional  ecclesiastical  observance,  it  seemed  good  to 
the  holy  synod  that  also  in  the  Church  of  the  Romans  the 
canons  shall  be  in  force  without  wavering  which  says:  If  any 
cleric  shall  be  found  to  fast  on  Sunday  or  on  the  Sabbath 
except  on  one  occasion  only,^  he  shall  be  deposed;  and  if  a 
layman  he  shall  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  67.     On  Eating  Blood. 

This  canon  is  less  distinctly  aimed  at  Rome.  In  the  West  the  pro- 
hibition against  eating  blood  seems  to  have  been  little  observed,  as  it 
had  been  given  another  interpretation.  At  the  time  of  the  Second 
Trullan  Council  the  practice  was  very  common.  Augustine,  it  might 
be  said,  did  not  consider  the  apostolic  command  as  binding  except  in 
the  special  circumstance  in  which  it  was  issued.  CJ.  Augustine, 
Contra  Faustum,  32  :  13. 

The  divine  Scriptures  command  us  to  abstain  from  blood, 
from  things  strangled,  and  from  fornication.  Those,  there- 
fore, who,  on  account  of  a  dainty  stomach,  prepare  by  any 
art  for  food  the  blood  of  animals  and  so  eat  it,  we  punish  suit- 
ably. If  any  one  henceforth  venture  to  eat  in  any  way  the 
blood  of  an  animal,  if  he  be  a  clergyman  let  him  be  deposed; 
if  a  layman,  let  him  be  excommunicated. 

Canon  82.     On  Pictures  of  the  Lamb  of  God. 

The  custom  which  is  here  condemned  was  prevalent  in  the  West. 

^7.  g.,  Saturdays. 

2  See  canon  69  of  the  ApostoHc  Canons,  which  prescribed  fasting  on  the  Satur- 
day before  Easter,  or  the  Preparation. 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  679 

In  some  pictures  of  the  holy  icons,  a  lamb  is  painted  to  which 
the  Forerunner^  points  his  finger,  and  this  is  received  to  serve 
as  a  type  of  grace,  indicating  beforehand  through  the  Law  our 
true  lamb,  Christ  our  God.  Embracing  therefore  the  ancient 
types  and  shadows  as  symbols  and  patterns  of  the  truth,  which 
have  been  given  to  the  Church,  we  prefer  ''grace  and  truth," 
receiving  it  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  Law.  In  order,  therefore, 
that  what  is  perfect  may  be  delineated  to  the  eyes  of  all,  at 
least  in  colored  expression,  we  decree  that  the  figure  of  the 
lamb  who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world,  Christ  our  God, 
be  henceforth  exhibited  according  to  human  form  in  the  icons, 
instead  of  the  ancient  lamb,  so  that  all  may  understand,  by 
means  of  it,  the  depth  of  the  humiliation  of  the  Word  of  God, 
and  that  we  may  recall  to  our  memory  His  Hfe  in  the  flesh, 
His  passion  and  salutary  death,  and  the  redemption  resulting 
therefrom  for  the  whole  world. 

(b)  Liber  Diurnus  Romanorum  Fontificum,  n.  58. 

Notification  to  the  Emperor  of  an  Election  of  a  Pontiff. 

The  Liber  Diurnus  was  the  book  of  official  formulae  used  on  occasions 
such  as  elections  of  pontiffs  and  the  conferring  of  the  palHum.  It  was 
composed  between  685  and  751,  and  was  employed  in  the  papal  chan- 
cellery down  to  the  eleventh  century,  when  it  became  antiquated  on 
account  of  the  changes  in  the  position  of  the  popes.  The  modern 
editions  of  the  book  are  by  Roziere,  Paris,  1869,  and  by  Sickel,  Vienna, 
1889.  The  text  may  be  found  in  Mirbt,  n.  195,  where  may  also  be 
found  numerous  other  useful  extracts. 

Although  it  has  not  been  without  the  merciful  divine  order- 
ing that,  after  the  death  of  the  supreme  pontiff,  the  votes  of 
all  should  agree  in  the  election  of  one,  and  that  there  be  per- 
fect harmony  so  that  no  one  at  all  is  to  be  found  who  would 
oppose  it,  it  is  yet  necessary  that  we  ought  obediently  to  pour 
forth  the  prayers  of  our  petitions  to  our  most  serene  and  most 
pious  lord,  who  is  known  to  rejoice  in  the  concord  of  his  sub- 
jects, and  graciously  to  grant  what  has  been  asked  by  them  in 
unanimity.     And  so  when  our  Pope  (name)  of  most  blessed 

*  John  the  Baptist. 


68o    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

memory  died,  the  assent  of  all  was  given,  by  the  will  of  God, 
to  the  election  of  (name),  the  venerable  archdeacon  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  because  from  the  beginning  of  his  Hfe  he  had  so 
served  the  same  church,  and  in  all  things  shown  himself  so 
able  that  he  ought  deservedly  to  be  placed,  with  the  divine 
approval,  over  the  ecclesiastical  government,  especially  since 
by  his  constant  association  with  the  aforesaid  most  blessed 
pontiff  (name),  he  has  been  able  to  attain  to  the  same  dis- 
tinctions of  so  great  merit,  by  which  the  same  prelate  of  holy 
memory  is  known  to  have  been  adorned,  who  by  his  words 
always  stirred  up  his  mind,  being  desirous  of  heavenly  joys, 
so  that  whatsoever  good  we  have  lost  in  his  predecessor  we 
are  confident  that  we  have  certainly  found  in  him.  Therefore, 
in  tears,  all  we  your  servants  pray  that  the  piety  of  the  lords 
may  deign  to  hear  the  supplication  of  their  servants,  and  the 
desires  of  their  petitioners  may  be  granted  by  the  command 
of  their  piety,  for  the  benefit  of  the  Empire,  that  command 
may  be  given  for  his  ordination;  so  that  when  we  have  been 
placed  by  your  sacred  and  exalted  clemency  under  him  as  our 
pastor,  we  may  always  pray  for  the  life  and  empire  of  our 
most  serene  lords  to  the  Lord  Almighty  and  to  the  blessed 
Peter,  prince  of  the  Apostles,  to  whose  church  it  has  been 
granted  that  a  worthy  ruler  be  ordained. 

Subscription  of  the  priests. 

I  (name),  by  the  mercy  of  God,  presbyter  of  the  holy  Roman 
Church,  consenting  to  this  action  made  by  us  in  regard  to 
(name),  the  venerable  archdeacon  of  the  holy  ApostoHc  See 
and  our  elected  Pope,  have  subscribed. 

Subscription  of  the  laity. 

I  (name),  servant  of  your  piety,  consenting  to  this  action 
drawn  up  by  us  in  regard  to  (name),  the  venerable  archdeacon 
of  the  holy  ApostoHc  See  and  our  elected  Pope,  have  sub- 
scribed. 

(c)  Liber  Diurnus  Romanorum  Pontificum,  ch.  60. 

Notification  of  the  Election  of  a  Pontiff  to  the  Exarch  of  Ravenna. 
The  text  may  be  found  in  part  in  Mirbt,  loc.  cit. 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  68i 

To  the  most  excellent  and  exalted  lord,  graciously  to  be 
preserved  to  us  for  a  long  life  in  his  princely  office  (name), 
exarch  of  Italy,  the  priests,  deacons,  and  all  the  clergy  of  Rome, 
the  magistrates,  the  army,  and  the  people  of  this  city  of  Rome 
as  suppKants  send  greeting. 

Providence  is  able  to  give  aid  in  human  affairs  and  to 
change  the  weeping  and  groaning  of  the  sorrowing  into  re- 
joicing. .  .  . 

Inasmuch  as  (name),  of  pontifical  memory,  has  been  called 
from  present  cares  to  eternal  rest,  as  is  the  lot  of  mortals,  a 
great  load  of  sorrow  oppressed  us,  for  as  guardians  we  were 
deprived  of  our  own  guardian.  But  the  accustomed  kindness 
of  our  God  did  not  permit  us  to  remain  long  in  this  affliction 
because  we  hoped  in  Him.  For  after  we  had  humbly  spent 
three  days  in  prayer  that  the  heavenly  kindness  might,  for 
the  merits  of  all,  make  known  whom  as  worthy  it  commanded 
to  be  elected  to  succeed  to  the  apostolic  office,  with  the  aid 
of  His  grace  w^hich  inspired  the  minds  of  all ;  and  after  we  had 
assembled  as  is  customary,  that  is,  the  clergy  and  the  people 
of  Rome  with  the  presence  of  the  nobility  and  the  army,  from 
the  least  to  the  greatest,  so  to  speak;  and  the  election,  with 
the  help  of  God  and  the  aid  of  the  holy  Apostles,  fell  upon  the 
person  of  (name),  the  most  holy  archdeacon  of  this  holy  Apos- 
toKc  See  of  the  Roman  Church.  The  good  and  chaste  life 
of  this  man,  beloved  of  God,  was  in  the  opinion  of  all  so  de- 
serving that  none  opposed  his  election,  no  one  was  absent, 
and  none  dissented  from  it.  For  why  should  not  men  agree 
unanimously  upon  him  whom  the  incomparable  and  unfail- 
ing providence  of  our  God  had  foreordained  to  this  office? 
For  without  doubt  this  had  been  determined  upon  in  the 
presence  of  God.  So  solemnly  performing  his  decrees  and 
confirming  with  our  signatures  the  desires  of  hearts  concern- 
ing his  election,  we  have  sent  you  our  fellow-servants  as  the 
bearers  of  this  letter  (names),  most  holy  bishop  (name),  ven- 
erable presbyter  (name),  regionary  notary  (name),  regionary 
subdeacons  (names),  honorable  citizens,  and  from  the  most 


682    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

flourishing  and  successful  Roman  army  {name),  most  eminent 
consul,  and  {names)  chief  men,  tribunes  of  the  army,  begging 
and  praying  together  that  your  excellency,  whom  may  God 
preserve,  may  with  your  accustomed  goodness  agree  with  our 
pious  choice;  because  he,  who  has  been  unanimously  elected 
by  our  humihty,  is  such  that  so  far  as  human  discernment  is 
able  to  see,  no  spot  of  reproach  appears  in  him.  And  there- 
fore we  beg  and  beseech  you,  by  God's  inspiration,  to  grant 
our  petition  quickly,  because  there  are  many  questions  and 
other  matters  arising  daily  which  require  for  remedy  the  care 
of  pontifical  favor.  And  the  affairs  of  the  province  and  the 
need  of  causes  connected  therewith  also  seek  and  await  the 
control  of  due  authority.  Besides  we  need  some  one  to  keep 
the  neighboring  enemy  in  check,  which  can  only  be  done  by 
the  power  of  God,  and  of  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles  through 
his  vicar,  the  bishop  of  Rome ;  since  it  is  well  known  that  at 
various  times  the  bishop  of  Rome  has  driven  off  enemies  by 
his  warnings,  and  at  other  times  he  has  turned  aside  and  re- 
strained them  by  his  prayers;  so  that  by  his  words  alone,  on 
account  of  their  reverence  for  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  they 
have  offered  voluntary  obedience,  and  thus  they,  whom  the 
force  of  arms  had  not  overcome,  have  yielded  to  the  warnings 
and  prayers  of  the  Pope. 

Since  these  things  are  so,  we  again  and  again  beseech  you, 
our  exalted  lord,  preserved  by  God,  that,  with  the  aid  and  in- 
spiration of  God  in  your  heart,  you  may  quickly  give  orders 
to  adorn  the  ApostoHc  See  by  the  completed  ordination  of 
the  same,  our  father.  And  we,  your  humble  servants,  on  see- 
ing our  desires  fulfilled,  may  then  give  unceasing  thanks  to 
God  and  to  you,  and  with  our  spiritual  pastor,  our  bishop, 
enthroned  in  the  Apostolic  Seat,  we  may  pour  out  prayers 
for  the  life  and  health  and  complete  victories  of  our  most 
exalted  and  Christian  lords  {names),  the  great  and  victorious 
emperors,  that  the  merciful  God  may  give  manifold  victories 
to  their  royal  courage,  and  cause  them  to  triumph  over  all 
peoples,  and  that  God  may  give  them  joy  of  heart,  because  the 


ROME  AND   CONSTANTINOPLE  683 

ancient  rule  of  Rome  has  been  restored.  For  we  know  that  he 
whom  we  have  elected  Pope  can,  with  his  prayers,  influence 
the  divine  omnipotence ;  and  he  has  prepared  a  joyful  increase 
for  the  Roman  Empire,  and  he  will  aid  you  in  this,  in  the 
government  of  this  province  of  Italy,  which  is  subject  to  you, 
and  will  aid  and  protect  all  of  us,  your  servants,  through  many 
years. 

Subscription  of  the  priests. 

I,  (name),  the  humble  archpriest  of  the  holy  Roman  Church, 
have  with  full  consent  subscribed  to  this  document  which 
we  have  made  concerning  (name),  most  holy  archdeacon,  our 
bishop  elect. 

And  the  subscription  of  the  laity. 

I,  (name),  in  the  name  of  God,  consul,  have  with  full  consent 
subscribed  to  this  document  which  we  have  made  concerning 
(name),  most  holy  archdeacon,  our  bishop-elect. 

(d)  Paulus  Diaconus,  Hist.  Langobardorum,  IV,  44.  (MSL, 
95:581.) 

Agilulf  may  have  been  a  convert  to  the  Catholic  faith,  v.  supra, 
§  99.  His  successors  were  not.  In  fact,  not  until  653,  when  Aribert, 
the  nephew  of  Theodelinda,  ascended  the  throne,  were  the  Lombards 
permanently  under  CathoHc  rulers. 

44.  After  Ariwald  (626-636)  had  reigned  twelve  years  over 
the  Lombards  he  departed  this  Hfe,  and  Rothari  of  the  family 
of  Arodus  took  the  kingdom  of  the  Lombards.  He  was  a 
strong,  brave  man,  and  walked  in  the  paths  of  justice;  in 
Christian  faith,  however,  he  did  not  hold  to  the  right  way, 
but  was  polluted  by  the  unbehef  of  the  Arian  heresy.  The 
Arians  say,  to  their  confusion,  that  the  Son  is  inferior  to  the 
Father  and,  in  the  same  way,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  inferior  to 
the  Father  and  the  Son;  we,  CathoHc  Christians,  on  the  con- 
trary, confess  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  are  one  true  God  in  three  persons,  equal  in  power  and 
glory.  In  the  times  of  Rothari  there  were  in  nearly  all  the 
cities  of  his  kingdom  two  bishops,  a  CathoHc  and  an  Arian. 


684    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

To  this  very  day  there  is  shown  in  the  city  of  Ticinus  [Pavia] 
the  place  where  the  Arian  bishop  resided;  at  the  church  of  St. 
Eusebius,  and  held  the  baptistery  while  the  Catholic  bishop  was 
at  the  head  of  another  church.  The  Arian  bishop,  however, 
who  was  in  this  city,  whose  name  was  Anastasius,  accepted  the 
Catholic  faith  and  afterward  ruled  the  Church  of  Christ. 
This  king  Rothari  caused  the  laws  of  the  Lombards  to  be  re- 
duced to  writing  and  named  the  book  The  Edict;  the  laws  of 
the  Lombards  up  to  that  time  had  been  retained  merely  in 
memory  and  by  their  use  in  the  courts.  This  took  place,  as 
the  king  in  the  preface  to  his  law-book  says,  in  the  seventy- 
seventh  year^  after  the  Lombards  came  into  Italy. 

§  109.  Rome,  Constantinople,  and  the  Lombards  in  the 
Period  of  the  First  Iconoclastic  Controversy; 
THE  Seventh  General  Council,  Nic^a,  A.  D.  787 

By  the  eighth  century  the  veneration  of  pictures  or  icons 
had  become  wide-spread  throughout  the  Eastern  Church. 
Apart  from  their  due  place  in  the  cultus,  grave  abuses  and 
superstitions  had  arisen  in  many  parts  of  the  Church  in  con- 
nection with  the  icons.  To  Leo  III  the  Isaurian  (717-741), 
and  to  the  army,  the  veneration  of  the  icons,  as  practised 
by  the  populace,  and  especially  by  the  monks,  seemed  but 
little  removed  from  the  grossest  idolatry.  Accordingly,  in 
an  edict  issued  in  726,  Leo  attempted  to  put  an  end  to  the 
abuses  by  preventing  all  veneration  of  the  icons.  Meeting 
with  opposition,  his  measures  passed  from  moderate  to 
severe.  In  Italy,  although  the  use  of  icons  was  not  devel- 
oped to  the  same  extent  as  in  the  East,  sympathy  was  entirely 
against  the  Iconoclasts.  Gregory  II  (715-731)  and  Gregory 
III  (731-741)  bitterly  reproached  and  denounced  the  action 
of  the  Emperor.  Nearly  all  the  exarchate  willingly  passed 
under  the  power  of  the  Lombards.  Other  parts  of  northern 
Italy  also  broke  with  the  Emperor.  Leo  retaliated  by  annex- 
^  The  Edict  says  seventy-sixth  year. 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  685 

ing  Illyricum  to  the  see  of  Constantinople  and  confiscating  the 
papal  revenues  in  southern  Italy.  From  that  time  the  con- 
nection between  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor  was  very  slight. 
The  Emperor  Cons  tan  tine  V  Copronymus  (741-775)  was  more 
severe  than  his  father,  and  in  many  respects  even  fiercely 
brutal  in  his  treatment  of  the  monks.  A  synod  was  assembled 
at  Constantinople,  754,  attended  by  three  hundred  and  thirty- 
eight  bishops,  who,  as  was  customary  in  Eastern  synods,  sup- 
ported the  Emperor.  His  son,  Leo  IV  Chazarus  (775-780), 
was  less  energetic  and  disposed  to  tolerate  the  use  of  icons  in 
private.  But  his  widow,  Irene,  the  guardian  of  her  infant 
son,  Constantine  VI,  was  determined  to  restore  the  images  or 
icons.  A  s3mod  held  at  Constantinople  in  786  was  broken  up 
by  the  soldiery  of  the  capital.  In  787  at  Nicaea  a  council  was 
called  at  a  safe  distance  and  Iconoclasm  was  condemned. 

Additional  source  material:  St.  John  Damascene  on  Holy  Images, 
Eng.  trans,  by  Mary  H.  Allies,  1898;  St.  John  of  Damascus,  Exposi- 
tion of  the  Orthodox  Faith,  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  IX;  Percival,  Seven  Ecu- 
menical Councils  (PNF). 

{a)  Liber  PontificaliSj  Vita  Gregorii  II.    Ed.  Duchesne,  I, 

403- 

Disorders  in  Italy  consequent  upon  Iconoclasm. 

The  following  passage  from  the  Liher  Pontificalis  gives  a  vivid  and, 
on  the  whole,  accurate  picture  of  the  confusion  in  Italy  during  the  last 
years  of  the  authority  of  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  in  the  peninsula. 
It  is  hardly  likely  that  the  Emperor  ordered  the  death  of  the  pontiff 
as  recorded,  and  more  probable  that  his  over-officious  representatives 
regarded  it  as  a  means  of  ingratiating  themselves  with  their  master. 
The  passage  is  strictly  contemporaneous,  as  the  Liher  Pontificalis,  at 
least  in  this  part,  is  composed  of  brief  biographies  of  Popes  written  im- 
mediately after  their  decease  and  in  some  instances  during  their  lives. 
For  a  fuller  statement  of  the  whole  period,  see  Hefele,  §§  332  fif.,  who 
gives  an  abstract  of  the  following  and  also  of  two  letters  alleged  to 
have  been  written  by  Gregory  II  to  the  Emperor,  which  Hefele  ac- 
cepts as  genuine.  For  a  criticism  of  these  letters,  see  Hodgkin,  op.  cit., 
VI,  501-505.  Hodgkin  gives  an  excellent  account  of  King  Liutprand 
in  ch.  XII  of  the  same  volume,  pp.  437-508,  and  throws  much  light  on 
the  following  passage. 

For  the  events  immediately  preceding  this,  see  Paulus  Diaconus, 
Hist.  Langobardorum,  VI,  46-48,  given  above  in  §  106.     Paulus  refers 


686    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

to  the  capture  of  Narnia  in  the  last  sentence  of  ch.  48,  and  his  next 
chapter  is  apparently  a  condensation  of  the  following  sections  of  the 
ofi&cial  papal  biography. 

At  that  time  [circa  A.  D.  725]  Narnia^  was  taken  by  the 
Lombards.  And  Liutprand,  the  king  of  the  Lombards,  ad- 
vanced upon  Ravenna  with  his  entire  army,  and  besieged  it 
for  some  days.  Taking  the  fortress  of  Classis,  he  bore  off 
many  captives  and  immense  booty.  After  some  time  the 
duke  BasiHus,  the  chartularius  Jordanes,  and  the  subdeacon 
John,  surnamed  Lurion,  conspired  to  kill  the  Pope;  and 
Marinus,  the  imperial  spatarius,  who  at  that  time  held  the 
government  of  the  duchy  of  Rome,  having  been  sent  by  the 
command  of  the  Emperor  to  the  royal  city,  joined  their  con- 
spiracy. But  they  could  not  find  an  opportunity.  The  plot 
was  broken  up  by  the  judgment  of  God,  and  he  therefore  left 
Rome.  Later  Paulus,  the  patrician,  was  sent  as  exarch  to 
Italy,  who  planned  how  at  length  he  might  accomplish  the 
crime;  but  their  plans  were  disclosed  to  the  Romans.  These 
were  so  enraged  that  they  killed  Jordanes  and  John  Lurion. 
BasiHus,  however,  became  a  monk  and  ended  his  life  hidden 
in  a  certain  place.  But  the  exarch  Paulus,  on  the  command  of 
the  Emperor,  tried  to  kill  the  pontiff  because  he  hindered  the 
levying  of  a  tax  upon  the  province,  intending  to  strip  the 
churches  of  their  property,  as  was  done  in  other  places,  and  to 
appoint  another  [Pope]  in  his  place.  After  this  another  spa- 
tarius was  sent  with  commands  to  remove  the  pontiff  from  his 
seat.  Then  again  the  patrician  Paulus  sent,  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  this  crime,  such  soldiers  as  he  could  withdraw 
from  Ravenna,  with  his  guard  and  some  from  the  camps. 
But  the  Romans  were  aroused,  and  from  all  sides  the  Lom- 
bards gathered  for  the  defence  of  the  pontiff  at  the  bridge 
of  Solario,  in  the  district  of  Spoleto,  and  the  dukes  of  the 
Lombards,  surrounding  the  Roman  territories,  prevented  this 
crime. 

In  a  decree  afterward  sent,  the  Emperor  ordered  that  there 

'  In  the  duchy  of  Spoleto. 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  687 

no  longer  should  be  in  any  church  an  image  ^  of  any  saint,  or 
martyr,  or  angel  (for  he  said  that  all  these  were  accursed); 
and  if  the  pontiff  assented  he  should  enjoy  his  favor,  but  if 
he  prevented  the  accompHshment  of  this  also  he  should  fall 
from  his  position.  The  pious  man,  despising  therefore  the  pro- 
fane command  of  the  prince,  armed  himself  against  the  Em- 
peror as  against  an  enemy,  rejecting  this  heresy  and  writing 
everywhere  to  warn  Christians  of  the  impiety  which  had  arisen. 

Aroused  by  this,  the  inhabitants  of  the  Pentapolis^  and 
the  armies  of  Venetia  resisted  the  command  of  the  Emperor, 
saying  that  they  would  never  assent  to  the  murder  of  the  pon- 
tiff, but  on  the  contrary  would  strive  manfully  for  his  defence. 
They  anathematized  the  exarch  Paulus,  him  who  had  sent 
him,  and  those  who  sided  with  him,  refusing  to  obey  them; 
and  throughout  Italy  all  chose  leaders^  for  themselves,  so 
eager  were  all  concerning  the  pontiff  and  his  safety.  When 
the  iniquities  of  the  Emperor  were  known,  all  Italy  started 
to  choose  for  itself  an  emperor  and  conduct  him  to  Constan- 
tinople, but  the  pontiff  prevented  this  plan,  hoping  for  the 
conversion  of  the  prince. 

Meanwhile,  in  those  days,  the  duke  ExhiKratus,*  deceived 
by  the  instigation  of  the  devil,  with  his  son  Adrian,  occupied 
parts  of  Campania,  persuading  the  people  to  obey  the  Em- 
peror and  kill  the  pontiff.  Then  all  the  Romans  pursued  after 
him,  took  him,  and  killed  both  him  and  his  son.  After  this 
they  chased  away  the  duke  Peter  [governor  of  Rome  under 
the  Emperor],  saying  that  he  had  written  against  the  pontiff 
to  the  Emperor.  When,  therefore,  a  dissension  arose  in  and 
about  Ravenna,  some  consenting  to  the  wickedness  of  the 
Emperor  and  some  holding  to  the  pontiff  and  those  faithful 
to  him,  a  great  fight  took  place  between  them  and  they  killed 
the  patrician  Paulus  [exarch  at  that  time].  And  the  cities 
of  Castra  ^Emilia,  Ferrorianus,  Montebelli,  Verabulmn,  with 

^  I.e.,  a  picture,  and  not  a  statue,  for  these  had  been  forbidden  long  since. 

2  Rimini,  Pesaro,  Fano,  Sinigaglia,  and  Ancona. 

^  Duces  can  hardly  mean  dukes  here. 

^  Governor  of  Naples  under  the  Emperor. 


688    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

its  towns,  Buxo,  Persiceta,  the  Pentapolis,  and  Auximanum, 
surrendered  to  the  Lombards.^  After  this  the  Emperor  sent 
to  Naples  Eutychius  Fratricius,  the  eunuch,  who  had  formerly 
been  exarch,  to  accomplish  what  the  exarch  Paulus,  the  spa- 
tarii,  and  the  other  evil  counsellors  had  been  unable  to  do. 
But  by  God's  ordering  his  miserable  craft  was  not  so  hidden 
but  that  his  most  wicked  plot  was  disclosed  to  all,  that  he 
would  attempt  to  violate  the  churches  of  Christ,  to  destroy 
all,  and  to  take  away  the  property  of  all.  When  he  had  sent 
one  of  his  own  men  to  Rome  with  written  instructions,  among 
other  things,  that  the  pontiff  should  be  killed,  together  with 
the  chief  men  of  Rome,  this  most  bloody  outrage  was  dis- 
covered, and  the  Romans  would  at  once  have  killed  the  mes- 
senger of  the  patrician  if  the  opposition  of  the  Pope  had  not 
prevented  them.  But  they  anathematized  the  same  exarch 
Eutychius,  binding  themselves,  great  and  small,  by  an  oath, 
never  to  permit  the  pontiff,  the  zealous  guardian  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith  and  the  defender  of  the  churches,  to  be  killed  or  re- 
moved, but  to  be  ready  all  to  die  for  his  safety.  Thereupon 
the  patrician  [Eutychius],  promising  many  gifts  to  the  dukes 
and  to  the  king  of  the  Lombards,  attempted  to  persuade  them 
by  his  messengers  to  abandon  the  support  of  the  pontiff.  But 
they  despised  the  man's  detestable  wiles  contained  in  his  let- 
ters; and  the  Romans  and  the  Lombards  bound  themselves 
as  brothers  in  the  bond  of  faith,  all  desiring  to  suffer  a  glorious 
death  for  the  pontiff,  and  never  to  permit  him  to  receive  any 
harm,  contending  for  the  true  faith  and  the  salvation  of 
Christians.  While  they  were  doing  this  that  father  chose, 
as  a  stronger  protection,  to  distribute  with  his  own  hand  such 
alms  to  the  poor  as  he  found;  giving  himself  to  prayers  and 
fastings,  he  besought  the  Lord  daily  with  litanies,  and  he  re- 
mained always  more  supported  by  this  hope  than  by  men; 
however,  he  thanked  the  people  for  their  offer,  and  with  gentle 

1  These  names  are  not  all  to  be  identified.  Auximanum,  however,  is  Osimo, 
south  of  Ancona;  Ferronianus  is  Fregnano,  near  Modena;  Montebelli  or  Monte 
Veglio  is  west  of  Bologna;  Persiceta  is  also  near  Bologna,  which  Paulus  Diaconus 
says  was  taken  by  the  Lombards,  op.  clt.,  VI,  49. 


ICONOCLASTIC   PERIOD  689 

words  he  besought  all  to  serve  God  with  good  deeds  and  to 
remain  steadfast  in  the  faith;  and  he  admonished  them  not 
to  renounce  their  love  and  fidelity  to  the  Roman  Emperor. 

At  that  time  in  the  eleventh  indiction/  the  castle  of  Sutri 
was  taken  by  the  Lombards  by  craft,  and  was  held  by  them 
for  a  period  of  forty  days,^  but  urged  by  the  constant  letters 
of  the  pontifif  and  warnings  sent  to  the  king,  when  very 
many  gifts  had  been  made,  as  a  gift  at  least  for  all  the 
towns,  the  king  of  the  Lombards  restored  them  and  gave 
them  as  a  donation  to  the  most  blessed  Apostles  Peter  and 
Paul.  At  the  same  time,  in  the  twelfth  indiction  [A.  D.  729], 
in  the  month  of  January,  for  ten  days  and  more,  a  star,  called 
Gold-bearing,^  with  rays,  appeared  in  the  west.  Its  rays  were 
toward  the  north  and  reached  to  the  midst  of  the  heavens. 
At  that  time,  also,  the  patrician  Eutychius  and  King  Liutprand 
made  a  most  wicked  agreement,  that  when  an  army  had  been 
gathered  the  king  should  subject  Spoleto  and  Beneventum,^ 
and  the  exarch  of  Rome,  and  they  should  carry  out  what  was 
already  commanded  concerning  the  pontiff.  When  the  king 
came  to  Spoleto,  oaths  and  hostages  were  received  from  both 
[i.  e.,  the  dukes  of  Spoleto  and  Beneventum],  and  he  came  with 
all  his  troops  to  the  Campus  Neronis.^  The  pontiff  went 
forth  and  presented  himself  before  him  and  endeavored  to  the 
extent  of  his  abihty  to  soften  the  mind  of  the  king  by  pious 
warnings,  so  that  the  king  threw  himself  at  his  feet  and  prom- 
ised to  harm  no  one;  and  he  was  so  moved  to  compunction 
by  the  pious  warnings  that  he  abandoned  his  undertaking 
and  laid  on  the  grave  of  the  Apostle  his  mantle,  his  military 
cloak,  his  sword  belt,  his  short  two-edged  sword,  and  his  golden 
sword,  as  well  as  a  golden  crown  and  a  silver  cross.  After 
prayer  he  besought  the  pontiff  to  consent  to  make  peace  with 

^From  Sept.  i,  A.  D.  727,  to  Sept.  i,  A.  D.  728. 

2  One  hundred  and  forty,  according  to  another  reading. 

3  Aurifer,  or,  according  to  another  reading,  Lucifer. 

^  Both  duchies  were  nominally  under  the  king  of  the  Lombards,  but  it  is  very 
probable  that  they  were  attempting  to  free  themselves  from  his  rule. 

^  The  Campus  Neronis  was  outside  the  walls  of  Rome,  as  they  then  extended, 
and  adjoined  the  Vatican. 


690    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

the  exarch,  which  also  was  done.  So  he  departed,  for  the  king 
forsook  the  bad  designs  with  which  he  had  entered  into  the 
plot  with  the  exarch.  While  the  exarch  remained  in  Rome, 
there  came  into  Tuscany  to  Castrum  Maturianense,^  a  certain 
deceiver,  Tiberius  by  name,  called  also  Petasius,^  who  attempted 
to  usurp  the  rule  of  the  Roman  Empire  and  deceived  some  of  the 
less  important,  so  that  Maturianum,  Luna,  and  Blera  [Bieda] 
took  oath  to  him.  The  exarch,  hearing  of  this,  was  troubled, 
but  the  most  holy  Pope  supported  him,  and,  sending  with  him 
his  chief  men  and  an  army,  he  advanced  and  came  to  Castrum 
Maturianense.  Petasius  was  killed,  his  head  was  cut  off  and 
sent  to  Constantinople,  to  the  prince;  nevertheless  the  Em- 
peror showed  no  great  favor  to  the  Romans. 

After  these  things  the  malice  of  the  Emperor  became  evi- 
dent, on  account  of  which  he  had  persecuted  the  pontiff.  For 
he  compelled  all  the  inhabitants  of  Constantinople,  by  force 
and  persuasion,  to  displace  the  images  of  the  Saviour  as  well 
as  of  His  holy  mother,  and  of  all  saints,  wherever  they  were, 
and  (what  is  horrible  to  tell)  to  burn  them  in  the  fire  in  the 
middle  of  the  city,  and  to  whitewash  all  the  painted  churches. 
Because  very  many  of  the  people  of  the  city  withstood  the 
commission  of  such  an  enormity,  they  were  subjected  to 
punishment;  some  were  beheaded,  others  lost  a  part  of  their 
body.  For  this  reason  also,  because  Germanus,  the  prelate 
of  the  church  of  Constantinople,  was  unwilling  to  consent  to 
this,  the  Emperor  deprived  him  of  his  pontifical  position,  and 
appointed  in  his  place  the  presbyter  Anastasius,  an  accomplice. 
Anastasius  sent  to  the  Pope  a  synodical  letter,  but  when  that 
holy  man  saw  that  he  held  the  same  error,  he  did  not  regard 
him  as  brother  and  fellow-priest,  but  wrote  him  warning  let- 
ters, commanding  him  to  be  put  out  of  his  sacerdotal  ofiice 
unless  he  returned  to  the  Catholic  faith.  He  also  charged  the 
Emperor,  urging  wholesome  advice,  that  he  should  desist  from 
such  execrable  wickedness,  and  he  warned  him  by  letter.^ 

1  Barberino,  fifteen  miles  east  of  Civita  Vecchia. 

2  This  was  his  real  name.  ^  See  introduction  to  this  extract. 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  691 

(b)  John  of  Damascus,  De  Fide  Orthodoxaj  IV,  16.  (MSG, 
94  :  1168.) 

John  of  Damascus  {oh.  ante  754)  was  the  last  of  the  Church  Fathers 
of  the  East.  He  became  the  classical  representative  of  the  theology 
of  the  Eastern  Church,  and  his  system  forms  the  conclusion  and  sum- 
ming up  of  the  results  of  all  the  great  controversies  that  had  distracted 
that  part  of  the  Church.  His  greatest  work,  De  Fide  Orthodoxa,  may  be 
found  translated  in  PNF.  In  the  following  chapter  John  sums  up 
briefly  the  arguments  which  he  uses  in  his  three  orations  In  Defence 
of  Images  (to  be  found  in  MSG,  94  :  1227  J".;  for  translation  see  head 
of  section).  By  images  one  should  understand  pictures  rather  than 
statues.  The  latter  were  never  common  and  fell  entirely  out  of  use 
and  were  forbidden.  They  seemed  too  closely  akin  to  idols.  In  the 
translation,  the  phrase  "to  show  reverence"  is  the  equivalent  of  the 
Greek  xpoaxuvdw. 

Since  some  find  fault  with  us  for  showing  reverence  and  hon- 
oring the  image  of  our  Saviour  and  that  of  our  Lady,  and  also 
of  the  rest  of  the  saints  and  servants  of  Christ,  let  them  hear 
that  from  the  beginning  God  made  man  after  His  own  image. 
On  what  other  grounds,  then,  do  we  show  reverence  to  each 
other  than  that  we  are  made  after  God's  image?  For  as 
Basil,  that  most  learned  expounder  of  divine  things,  says:  ^'  The 
honor  given  to  the  image  passes  over  to  the  prototype."^ '  Now 
a  prototype  is  that  which  is  imaged,  from  which  the  form  is 
derived.  Why  was  it  that  the  Mosaic  people  showed  reverence 
round  about  the  tabernacle  which  bore  an  image  and  type  of 
heavenly  things,  or  rather  the  whole  creation?  God,  indeed, 
said  to  Moses:  ''  Look  that  thou  make  all  things  after  the  pat- 
tern which  was  shewed  thee  in  the  mount"  [Ex.  33  :  10].  The 
Cherubim,  also,  which  overshadowed  the  mercy-seat,  are  they 
not  the  work  of  men's  hands?  What  is  the  renowned  temple 
at  Jerusalem?  Is  it  not  made  by  hands  and  fashioned  by  the 
skill  of  men?  The  divine  Scriptures,  however,  blame  those 
who  show  reverence  to  graven  images,  but  also  those  who 
sacrifice  to  demons.  The  Greeks  sacrificed  and  the  Jews  also 
sacrificed;  but  the  Greeks  to  demons;  the  Jews,  however,  to 
God.  And  the  sacrifice  of  the  Greeks  was  rejected  and  con- 
1  See  next  selection. 


692    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

demned,  but  the  sacrifice  of  the  just  was  acceptable  to  God. 
For  Noah  sacrificed,  and  God  smelled  a  sweet  savor  of  a  good 
purpose,  receiving,  also,  the  fragrance  of  a  good-will  toward 
Him.  And  so  the  graven  images  of  the  Greeks,  since  they 
were  the  images  of  demon  deities,  were  rejected  and  forbidden. 
But  besides  this,  who  can  make  an  imitation  of  the  invisi- 
ble, incorporeal,  uncircumscribed,  and  formless  God?  There- 
fore to  give  form  to  the  Deity  is  the  height  of  folly  and  impi- 
ety. And  therefore  in  the  Old  Testament  the  use  of  images  was 
repressed.  But  after  God,  in  the  bowels  of  His  mercy,  became 
for  our  salvation  in  truth  man,  not  as  He  was  seen  by  Abraham 
in  the  semblance  of  a  man,  or  by  the  prophets,  but  He  became 
in  truth  man,  according  to  substance,  and  after  He  Hved  upon 
earth  and  dwelt  among  men,  worked  miracles,  suffered,  and  was 
crucified,  He  rose  again,  and  was  received  up  into  heaven;  since 
all  these  things  actually  took  place  and  were  seen  by  men, 
they  were  written  for  the  remembrance  and  instruction  of  us 
who  were  not  present  at  that  time,  in  order  that,  though  we 
saw  not,  we  may  still,  hearing  and  believing,  obtain  the  bless- 
ing of  the  Lord.  But  since  all  have  not  a  knowledge  of  let- 
ters nor  time  for  reading,  it  appeared  good  to  the  Fathers 
that  those  events,  as  acts  of  heroism,  should  be  depicted  on 
images^  to  be  a  brief  memorial  of  them.  Often,  doubtless, 
when  we  have  not  the  Lord's  passion  in  mind  and  see  the  image 
of  Christ's  crucifixion,  we  remember  the  passion  and  we  fall 
down  and  show  reverence  not  to  the  material  but  to  that 
which  is  imaged;  just  as  we  do  not  show  reverence  to  the 
material  of  the  Gospel,  nor  to  the  material  of  the  cross,  but  that 
which  these  typify.^  For  wherein  does  the  cross  that  typifies 
the  Lord  differ  from  a  cross  that  does  not  do  so?  It  is  the 
same  also  as  to  the  case  of  the  Mother  of  God.^  For  the  honor 
which  is  given  her  is  referred  to  Him  who  was  incarnate  of  her. 
And  similarly  also  the  brave  acts  of  holy  men  stir  us  to  bravery 

^  I.  e.,  in  pictures. 

2  John  had  a  strong  argument  here  as  the  Iconoclasts  reverenced  the  true 
cross. 
^  Geo^-^Twp,  not  e£OT6xo<;. 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  693 

and  to  emulation  and  imitation  of  their  valor  and  to  the  glory 
of  God.  For,  as  we  said,  the  honor  that  is  given  to  the  best 
of  fellow  servants  is  a  proof  of  good-will  toward  our  common 
lady,  and  the  honor  rendered  the  image  passes  over  to  the 
prototype.  But  this  is  an  unwritten  tradition,  just  as  is  also 
to  show  reverence  toward  the  East  and  to  the  cross,  and  very 
many  similar  things.^ 

A  certain  tale  is  told  also  that  when  Augarus  [i.  e.,  Abgarus] 
was  king  over  the  city  of  the  Edessenes,  he  sent  a  portrait- 
painter  to  paint  a  likeness  of  the  Lord;  and  when  the  painter 
could  not  paint  because  of  the  brightness  that  shone  from  His 
countenance,  the  Lord  himself  put  a  garment  over  His  divine 
and  Hfe-giving  face  and  impressed  on  it  an  image  of  Himself, 
and  sent  this  to  Augarus  to  satisfy  in  this  way  his  desire. 

Moreover,  that  the  Apostles  handed  down  much  that  was 
unwritten,  Paul  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  writes:  There- 
fore, brethren,  stand  fast  and  hold  the  traditions  which  ye  have 
been  taught  of  us,  whether  by  word  or  by  epistles  [II  Thess. 
2  :  14].  And  to  the  Corinthians  he  writes:  Now  I  praise  you, 
brethren,  that  ye  remembered  me  in  all  things  and  keep  the 
traditions  as  I  have  delivered  them  to  you  [I  Cor.  2:2]. 

(c)  Basil  the  Great,  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  ch.  18.  (MSG, 
32  :  149.) 

Basil  is  speaking  of  the  three  persons  of  the  Trinity,  and  says  that 
although  we  speak  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit,  we  must  not 
count  up  "by  way  of  addition  gradually  increasing  from  unity  to  mul- 
titude," but  that  number  must  be  understood  otherwise  in  speaking 
of  the  three  divine  persons. 

How  then,  if  one  and  one,  are  there  not  two  Gods?  Because 
we  speak  of  a  king  and  of  the  king's  image,  and  not  of  two 
kings.  The  power  is  not  parted  nor  the  glory  divided.  The 
power  ruHng  over  us  is  one,  and  the  authority  one,  and  so  also 
the  doxology  ascribed  by  us  is  one  and  not  plural;  because 
the  honor  paid  to  the  image  passes  over  to  the  prototype. 

1  Cf.  Basil,  De  Spiritu,  ch.  27;  v.  supra,  §  87,  for  Basil  on  the  force  of  tradi- 
tion. 


694    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

Now  what  in  the  one  case  the  image  is  by  reason  of  imitation, 
that  in  the  other  case  the  Son  is  by  nature;  and  as  in  works  of 
art  the  Kkeness  is  dependent  upon  the  form,  so  in  the  case  of 
the  divine  and  uncompounded  nature  the  union  consists  in 
the  communion  of  the  godhead. 

(d)  The  Seventh  General  Council,  Nicaea,  A.  D.  787, 
Definition  of  Faith.     Mansi,  XIII,  398  ff. 

In  addition  to  Hefele,  and  PNF,  ser.  II,  vol.  XIV,  see  Mendham, 
The  Seventh  General  Council,  the  Second  of  Niccea,  in  which  the  Worship 
of  Images  was  Established;  with  copious  notes  from  the  ^^ Caroline 
Books, ''^  compiled  by  order  of  Charlemagne  for  its  Confutation,  London, 
n.  d. 

The  holy,  great  and  ecumenical  synod  which,  by  the  grace 
of  God  and  the  command  of  the  pious  and  Christ-loving 
Emperors,  Constantine,  and  Irene  his  mother,  was  gathered 
together  for  the  second  time  at  Nicaea,  the  illustrious  metrop- 
olis of  the  eparchy  of  Bithynia,  in  the  holy  Church  of  God 
which  is  named  Sophia,  having  followed  the  tradition  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  hath  defined  as  follows: 

Christ  our  Lord,  who  hath  bestowed  upon  us  the  light  of 
the  knowledge  of  Himself,  and  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
darkness  of  idolatrous  madness,  having  espoused  to  Himself 
His  holy  Catholic  Church  without  spot  or  defect,  promised 
that  He  would  so  preserve  her;  and  assured  His  holy  disciples, 
saying,  "I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world"  [Matt.  28  :  20],  which  promise  He  made,  not  only  to 
them,  but  to  us  also  who  through  them  should  beheve  in  His 
name.  But  some,  not  considering  this  gift,  and  having 
become  fickle  through  the  temptation  of  the  wily  enemy,  have 
fallen  from  the  right  faith;  for,  withdrawing  from  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  Catholic  Church,  they  have  erred  from  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  and  as  the  proverb  saith:  "The  husband- 
men have  gone  astray  in  their  own  husbandry,  and  have 
gathered  in  their  hands  sterility,"  because  certain  priests  in 
deed,  but  not  priests  in  reality,  had  dared  to  slander  the  God- 
approved  ornaments  of  the  sacred  monuments.    Of  whom  God 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  695 

cries  aloud  through  the  prophet:  '^Many  pastors  have  cor- 
rupted my  vineyard,  they  have  polluted  my  portion"  [Jer. 
12  :  10;  cf.  LXX].  And,  forsooth,  following  profane  men, 
trusting  to  their  own  senses,  they  have  calumniated  His  holy 
Church  espoused  to  Christ  our  God,  and  have  not  distin- 
guished between  holy  and  profane,  styling  the  images  of  the 
Lord  and  of  His  saints  by  the  same  name  as  the  statute  of 
diabolical  idols.  Seeing  which  things,  our  Lord  God  (not 
willing  to  behold  His  people  corrupted  by  such  manner  of 
plague)  hath  of  His  good  pleasure  called  us  together,  the  chief 
of  His  priests,  from  every  quarter,  moved  with  a  divine  zeal 
and  brought  hither  by  the  will  of  our  Emperors,  Constantine 
and  Irene,  to  the  end  that  the  divine  tradition  of  the  Catholic 
Church  may  receive  stabiHty  by  our  common  decree.  There- 
fore, with  all  diligence,  making  a  thorough  examination  and 
investigation,  and  following  the  trend  of  the  truth,  dimin- 
ishing naught,  adding  naught,  we  preserve  unchanged  all 
things  which  pertain  to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  following 
the  six  ecumenical  synods,  especially  that  which  met  in  this 
illustrious  metropolis  of  Nicaea,  as  also  that  which  was  after- 
ward gathered  together  in  the  God-preserved  royal  city. 
We  beheve  in  one  God  .  .  .  Hfe  of  the  world  to  come.  Amen.^ 
We  detest  and  anathematize  Arius  and  all  who  agree  with 
him  and  share  his  absurd  opinion;  also  Macedonius  and  those 
who,  following  him,  are  well  styled  foes  of  the  Spirit.^  We 
confess  that  our  lady,  St.  Mary,  is  properly  and  truly  the 
Theotokos,  because  she  bore,  after  the  flesh,  one  of  the  Holy 
Trinity,  to  wit,  Christ  our  God,  as  the  Council  of  Ephesus  has 
already  defined,  when  it  cast  out  of  the  Church  the  impious 
Nestorius  with  his  allies,  because  he  introduced  a  personal 
['n'po(T(0'mK7]v\  duahty  [in  Christ].  With  the  Fathers  of  this 
synod  we  confess  the  two  natures  of  Him  who  was  incarnate 
for  us  of  the  immaculate  Theotokos  and  ever- Virgin  Mary, 

^  The  creed  of  Nicasa  is  not  here  recited,  only  the  so-called  creed  of  Con- 
stantinople, but  without  the  filioque  in  the  Greek. 
2  Pneumatomachians. 


696    DISSOLUTION  OF  IMPERIAL  STATE  CHURCH 

recognizing  Him  as  perfect  God  and  perfect  man,  as  also  the 
Council  of  Chalcedon  hath  promulgated,  expelling  from  the 
divine  Atrium  as  blasphemers,  Eutyches  and  Dioscurus;  and 
placing  with  them  Severus,  Peter,  and  a  number  of  others 
blaspheming  in  divers  fashions.  Moreover,  with  these  we 
anathematize  the  fables  of  Origen,  Evagrius,  and  Didymus, 
in  accordance  with  the  decision  of  the  Fifth  Council  held  at 
Constantinople.  We  affirm  that  in  Christ  there  are  two  wills 
and  operations  according  to  the  reality  of  each  nature,  as  also 
the  Sixth  Council  held  at  Constantinople  taught,  casting  out 
Sergius,  Honorius,  Cyrus,  Pyrrhus,  Macarius,  and  those 
who  are  unwilling  to  be  reverent  and  who  agree  with  these. 

To  make  our  confession  short,  we  keep  unchanged  all  the 
ecclesiastical  traditions  handed  down  to  us,  written  or  un- 
written, and  of  these  one  is  the  making  of  pictorial  represen- 
tations, agreeable  to  the  history  of  the  preaching  of  the  Gos- 
pel, a  tradition  useful  in  many  respects,  but  especially  in  this, 
that  so  the  incarnation  of  the  Word  of  God  is  shown  forth  as 
real  and  not  merely  fantastic,  for  these  have  mutual  indi- 
cations, and  without  doubt  have  also  mutual  significations. 

We,  therefore,  following  the  royal  pathway  and  the  divinely 
inspired  authority  of  our  holy  Fathers  and  the  traditions  of 
the  Catholic  Church  for,  as  we  all  know,  the  Holy  Spirit 
dwells  in  her,  define  with  all  certitude  and  accuracy,  that  just 
as  the  figure  of  the  precious  and  life-giving  cross,  so  also  the 
venerable  and  holy  images,  as  well  in  painting  and  mosaic, 
as  of  other  fit  materials,  should  be  set  forth  in  the  holy  churches 
of  God,  and  on  the  sacred  vessels  and  on  the  vestments  and 
on  hangings  and  in  tablets  both  in  houses  and  by  the  wayside, 
to  wit,  the  figure  of  our  Lord  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
of  our  spotless  lady,  the  Theotokos,  of  the  venerable  angels, 
of  all  saints,  and  of  all  pious  people.  For  by  so  much  the  more 
frequently  as  they  are  seen  in  artistic  representation,  by  so 
much  the  more  readily  are  men  lifted  up  to  the  memory  of 
their  prototypes,  and  to  a  longing  after  them;  and  to  these 
should   be   given   due  salutation   and   honorable   reverence 


ICONOCLASTIC  PERIOD  697 

[a(T7ra(TfjLov  koI  TLiJLijTiKrjv  7rpo^Kvvr}(7Lv],  not  indeed  that  true 
worship  [rrjv  akT)6Lvr)v  Xarpeiav]  which  pertains  alone  to  the  di- 
vine nature;  but  to  these,  as  to  the  figure  of  the  precious  and 
life-giving  cross,  and  to  the  book  of  the  Gospels  and  to  other 
holy  objects,  incense  and  lights  may  be  offered  according  to 
ancient  pious  custom.  For  the  honor  which  is  paid  to  the 
image  passes  on  to  that  which  the  image  represents,  and  he 
who  shows  reverence  [TrpoaKwei]  to  the  image  shows  reverence 
to  the  subject  represented  in  it.  For  thus  the  teaching  of  our 
holy  Fathers,  which  is  called  the  tradition  of  the  CathoHc 
Church,  which  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the  other  hath 
received  the  Gospel,  is  strengthened.  Thus  we  follow  Paul, 
who  spake  in  Christ,  and  the  whole  divine  Apostolic  company 
and  the  holy  Fathers,  holding  fast  the  traditions  which  we 
have  received.  So  we  sing  prophetically  the  triumphal  hymns 
of  the  Church:  Rejoice  greatly,  0  daughter  of  Sion;  Shout, 
O  daughter  of  Jerusalem.  Rejoice  and  be  glad  with  all  thy 
heart.  The  Lord  hath  taken  away  from  thee  the  oppression 
of  thy  adversaries;  thou  art  redeemed  from  the  hand  of  thy 
enemies:  The  Lord  is  a  king  in  the  midst  of  thee;  thou  shalt 
not  see  evil  any  more,  and  peace  be  unto  thee  forever. 

Those,  therefore,  who  dare  to  think  or  teach  otherwise,  or 
as  wicked  heretics  dare  to  spurn  the  traditions  of  the  Church 
and  to  invent  some  novelty,  or  else  to  reject  some  of  those 
things  which  the  Church  hath  received,  to  wit,  the  book  of 
the  Gospels,  or  the  image  of  the  cross,  or  the  pictorial  icons, 
or  the  holy  relics  of  a  martyr,  or  evilly  and  sharply  to  devise 
anything  subversive  of  the  lawful  traditions  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  or  to  turn  to  common  uses  the  sacred  vessels  and  the 
venerable  monasteries,  if  they  be  bishops  or  clerics  we  com- 
mand that  they  be  deposed;  if  religious^  or  laics,  that  they  be 
cut  off  from  communion. 

1  /.  e.,  monks. 


INDEX 


The  Analytical  Table  of  Contents  at  the  opening  of  this  volume  should  be 
used  to  supplement  this  Index. 


Acacius  of  Constantinople,  526,  536. 

Adoptionists,  172. 

Advent,  second.     See  "Chiliasm." 

JEUa.  Capitolina,  361. 

^ons.  See  "Gnosticism,"  "Basil- 
ides,"  "Valentinus." 

Africa,  North,  Church  of,  157,  281. 
See  also  "Tertullian,"  "Cyprian," 
"Donatism,"  "Augustine." 

Agape,  41. 

Agatho  of  Rome,  652. 

Agde,  council  of  (A.  D.  506),  canons, 
616. 

Alexander  of  Alexandria,  300/.,  302. 

Alexander  of  Jerusalem,  207. 

Alexandria,  catechetical  school  of, 
189-202. 

Alexandria,  councils  of  (A.  D.  320), 
304;  (A.  D.  362),  349-352;  (A.  D. 
430) ,  anathematisms,  505  ff. 

Allegorism,  or  Allegorical  Exegesis, 
15/.,  120;  Origen  on,  199/.;  Nepos 
on,  219/.;  Methodius  on,  230;  Au- 
gusdne  on,  442  /. 

Alms,  as  expiation  of  sin,  48,  1 69-1 71. 

Ambrose  of  Milan,  reply  to  Symma- 
chus,  342-346;  epistle  to  Theodo- 
sius,  390/.;  invocation  of  saints, 
397;  patron  of  monasticism,  409;  on 
Fall  of  Man,  438. 

Anastasius,  emp.,  527,  530,  575. 

Anastasius  of  Rome,  condemnation  of 
Origen,  487/. 

Ancyra,  council  of  (A.  D.  358),  348, 
412,  675. 

Angels,  invocation  of,  400. 

Anicetus  of  Rome,  164. 

Anointing,  484. 

Anthony,  hermit,  248-251,  409. 

Antioch,  council  of  (A.  D.  269),  225/.; 


(A.  D.  341),  creed,  313  /.;  canons, 

362-364,  675. 
Antioch,  school  of,  504,  511. 
Apelles,  105. 
Aphthartodocetism,  553. 
ApoUinaris  the  Elder,  334. 
Apollinaris  of  Laodicasa,  354,  494  /., 

498. 
ApoUinarius  of  Hierapolis,  11 1. 
Apollonius,  Antimontanist,  108. 
Apologist,  69/.;  theology  of,  130/. 
Apostles,  Sff.,  40. 
Apostles'  Creed,  123-126. 
Apostolic  Age,  5-12. 
Apostolic  churches,  1 1 1  ^. 
Apostolic  Fathers,  13. 
Apostolic  succession,  112-115,  122. 
Appeals    to    Emperor,    359,   370;   to 

Rome,  Sardica  on,  364-366;  rescript 

of  Gratian  and  Valentinian  on,  366/. 
Archelaus,  82. 

Arian  controversy,  297-320,  348-356. 
Arianism  among  the  Germans :  among 

the  Goths,  426/.;  among  the  Lom- 
bards, 683  /. 
Aristides,  Apology  of,  69-72. 
Aristotelian  philosophy,  174. 
Arius,  269,  293,  299/.;  epistle  to  Euse- 

bius  of  Nicomedia,  302;  Thalia,  303; 

confession,  307,  308. 
Aries,  council  of,  289-292. 
Artemon,  173. 
Asceticism,  46^.,  105,  248. 
Asia  Minor,  theology  of,  30-32,  135- 

139,  229/. 
Askidas,  Theodore  of,  546. 
Athanasius,  on  Sabellianism,  180;  on 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  223-225; 

exile,  308,  310. 
Athenagoras,  133. 


699 


700 


INDEX 


Andientia  Episcopalls,  380,  382  /. 

Augustine  of  Canterbury,  602-605. 

Augustine  of  Hippo,  life  and  conver- 
sion, 433-436;  his  type  of  piety, 
437;  on  Fall  of  Man  and  original  sin, 
438;  predestination,  440;  allegory, 
442;  merit,  444;  on  baptism,  448; 
sacraments,  449;  repression  of 
heresy,  450-453- 

Aurelian,  emp.,  227. 

Baptism,  39, 116, 167, 179/.,  184, 186, 
213,  231-234,  292,  447/-,  450,  452, 
464. 

Baptism,  rite  of,  33,  38,  232,  484/. 

Baptism  of  heretics,  243,  245-248, 
292. 

Barbarian  invasions,  420-423. 

Bardesanes,  54. 

Barnabas,  epistle  of,  14. 

Bartholomew,  Apostle,  55. 

Basil  of  Caesarea,  on  Sabellianism,  181; 
his  charities,  395;  monastic  rule, 
405;  on  tradition,  484;  on  reverence 
shown  images,  693. 

Basilides  the  Gnostic,  82  Jf.,  89,  91, 
120. 

Basiliscus,  emp.,  EncycUon  of,  523- 
526. 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  566,  569,  603^.; 
his  Penitential,  629/. 

Benedict  of  Nursia,  Rtde  of,  631-641. 

Bishops,  apostolic  appointment  of,  37; 
authority  of,  31,  41,  42,  237-239, 
265-270,  361-364;  election  of,  556, 
580/.;  State  service  of,  383/.;  suc- 
cession of,  III,  115,  122,  128. 

Boniface  II  of  Rome,  473. 

Braga,  council  of  (A.  D.  572),  619. 

Britain,  Church  in,  53,  566-570,  602- 
614. 

Caelestinus,  the  Pelagian,  455/.,  460. 

Caesarius  of  Aries,  621  /. 

Caesaropapism,  552^. 

Caius  of  Rome,  8. 

Callistus  of  Rome,  69,  175-177,  186. 

Canon.     See ''Council." 

Canon  law,  Quinisext  Council  on,  674- 

676. 
Canon  of  New  Testament,  117/.,  120, 

122/.,  532. 


Caracalla,  emp.,  142/.,  149. 
Carthage,  councils  of  (A.  D.  256),  238; 

(A.  D.  390),  417;  (A.  D.  418),  463- 

466. 
Cassian,  on  grace,  467-469;  on  secular 

studies,  646/. 
Cassiodorus,  530. 
Cassius,  Dio,  11. 

Cataphrygians.     See  "Montanists." 
Cathari.     See  "Novatians." 
Celestinus  of  Rome,  374. 
Celibacy,    laws    permitting,    285;    of 

clergy,  411-418,  676. 
Celsus,  55-59,  158. 
Celtic  Church  in  British  Isles,  566- 

570. 
Cerdo,  102/. 
Cerinthus,  81,  114. 
Chalcedon,  council  of   (A.   D.  451), 

511-522. 
Character,  doctrine  of,  452. 
Charity,  24,  35,  41,  48,  71/.,  145,  157, 

333,  394 f- 

Chastity,  47,  344. 

Chiliasm,  25-27,  219-221. 

Chorepiscopoi,  364. 

Christology.  See  " Apollinaris," 
"Logos,"  "Monarchians,"  "Mon- 
ophysites,"  "Monotheletes,"  "Sa- 
bellius." 

Christotokos,  Mary  as  the,  501. 

Chrysostom,  John,  372,  491  /. 

Church,  authority  of,  Augustine  on, 
454. 

Church,  organization  of,  Post-Apos- 
tolic age,  36-42. 

Church  and  State,  mutual  relations, 
530,  554; 

Circumcelliones ,  323. 

Classical  Literature,  Christian  use  of, 
334/.,  645-648. 

Clemens,  Flavius,  11/. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  on  Gnosticism, 
84, 89, 92, 189;  on  Greek  philosophy, 
190;  Christian  Gnosticism,  191  f. 

Clement  of  Rome,  7,  24,  36,  47, 129. 

Clergy,  distinguished  from  laity,  167, 
181  /.;  exemption  from  civil  bur- 
dens, 283  /.;  subjection  to  bishops, 
361.     See  "Ordination." 

Clovesho,  council  of  (A.  D.  747),  611, 
651. 


INDEX 


701 


Clovis,  king,  570-575- 

Code,  of  Justinian,  541;  of  Theodosius 
II,  424. 

Coenobites,  405. 

Columba,  569. 

Columbanus,  585-590. 

Commodus,  emp.,  69. 

Confession,  auricular,  384  /.;  public, 
see  "Penitential  Discipline." 

Constans  II,  Typos  of,  662-664. 

Constantine  I,  Edict  of  Milan,  263; 
fiscal  policy,  277-281;  ecclesiastical 
patronage,  281-285;  repression  of 
heathenism,  285-287;  ecclesiastical 
policy,  289-296. 

Constantinople,  councils  of  (A.  D. 
381),  353,  369, 480;  (A.  D.  382),  359, 
498;  (A.  D.  448),  512/.;  (A.  D.  553), 
551/.;  (A.  D.  681),  665-671;  (A.  D. 
691),  673-679. 

Constantinople,  see  of,  354,  477-480, 
521/. 

Constantius,  emp.,  326-329,  331. 

Corinth,  church  of,  7-9. 

Cornelius  of  Rome,  157,  217. 

Councils,  ecclesiastical,  no  /.,  157, 
177,  289;  general,  in  North  Africa, 
463;  provincial,  359  /.;  relation  of, 
to  secular  rulers,  369/.,  580. 

Creed,  forms  approximating  to  the 
Apostles',  32,  123-126. 

Creeds  and  confessions  of  faith,  of 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  222;  of 
Eusebius  of  Cassarea,  305 ;  of  Nicaea 
(A.  D.  325),  305;  of  Arius,  307;  II 
Antioch  (A.  D.  341),  313;  IV  An- 
tioch  (A.  D.  341),  314;  Nice  (A.  D. 
359),  318;  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  354; 
Epiphanius  of  Salamis,  355;  Ulfilas, 
426;  Antioch  (A.  D.  433),  510. 

Cyprian,  on  almsgiving,  169-171;  on 
the  lapsed,  208-210,  214-217;  on 
the  eucharist,  234-237;  on  the  epis- 
copate, 237-242;  on  the  unity  of  the 
Church,  240-245;  on  baptism  by 
heretics,  245-248. 

Cyril  of  Alexandria,  373,  494,  504; 
anathematisms  against  Nestorius, 
505-507,  510,  520,  note. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  348,  354. 

Cyrus  of  Alexandria,  520,  660;  for- 
mula of  union,  661/. 


Dacia,  Church  in,  53. 

Damasus  of  Rome,  270,  366,  380/. 

Deacon,  35,  37,  41. 

Deaconess,  21. 

Dead,  prayers  for,  169,  444/.,  624. 

Decius,  emp.,  persecution  under,  206- 

212. 
Decretals,  Siricius  on  the  force  of,  417. 
Decretum  Gelasii,  532-536. 
Demiurge,  90,  96. 
Deposition,  239,  363. 
DidacJie,  37,  46. 
Dio  Cassius,  on  Domitian  persecution, 

II. 
Diocese,  354,  362,  611,  616-620. 
Diocletian,  reorganization  of  the  Em- 
pire, 257/. 
Diocletian  persecution,  258-262. 
Diognetus,  Epistle  to,  28. 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  219/.,  222,  ff. 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  560-564. 
Dionysius  of  Corinth,  9,  24. 
Dionysius  Exiguus,  530,  611,  note. 
Dionysius  of  Rome,  223^.,  226. 
Dioscurus  of  Alexandria,  511/. 
Discipline,  penitential,  42-49,  166  /., 

169  /.,  183-188,  213,  215  /.,  362, 

384/.,  624-630. 
Divorce,  169,  391,  393,  612. 
Docetism,  32,  92. 
Domitian,  emp.,  7,  11. 
Donatus  and  Donatism,  245,  287/., 

289/.,  322-325,  445-454. 
Dynamistic  Monarchianism,  172-175, 

221,  225-229,  298. 

Easter,  worship  on,  164. 

Easter,  controversy  as  to  date,  161- 

165,  291,  295,  375,  570,  605/. 
Ecumenical    Patriarch,    Gregory   the 

Great  on  the  title,  592-595. 
Edessa,  Christianity  in,  54. 
Elvira,  council  of  (A.  D.  309),  386, 

415- 
Emanations,  Gnostic  theory  of,  85  /., 

94/._ 
Encratites,  105. 
Encyclion.     See  "Basiliscus." 
Ephesus,  church  of,  gf.,  116. 
Ephesus,  council  of  (A.  D.  431),  507- 

509;  (A.  D.  449),  512. 
Epiphanius  of  Salamis,  228,  355. 


702 


INDEX 


Episcopal  courts  of  arbitration.  See 
'^Audientia  Episcopalis.^^ 

Episcopate,  237-239. 

Epistula  pacts,  215. 

Eucharist,  18,  21,  30/.,  34,  38,  41,  42, 
116,  138/.,  231-237,  449,  622-624. 

Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  8,  305,  309. 

Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  299,  302,  308, 
310. 

EusebiMJS  of  Rome,  270, 

Eustathius,  309,  348. 

Eutyches  and  Eutychian  contro- 
versy, 511-522. 

Evagrius  Scholasticus,  274. 

Exomologesis,  185.  ' 

Extension  of  Christianity,  18,  52-55, 
156-159,  425-429,  566-570,  570- 
573,  602-605. 

Fasting,  33,  38,  48/.,  71,  99,  166,  171, 

232,  678. 
Felicissimus,  212,  215-217. 
Felicitas.     See  "Perpetua." 
Felix  of  Aptunga,  291. 
Fihrist  of  An  Nadim,  on  Mani,  252- 

256. 
Filiogue,  addition  of,  to  the  Creed,  577. 
Firmilian,  epistle  of,  on  Stephen  of 

Rome,  242-245. 
Flavian  of  Constantinople,  512^. 
Flora,  Epistle  of  Ptolomaeus  to,  95- 

102. 
Formula  Macrostichos,  180. 
Franks,  conversion  of,  si^JBf- 

Galen,  174. 

Galerius,  emp.,  260,  262. 

Gangra,  council  of,  canons,  386,  413. 

Gelasius  of  Rome,  531,  532-536. 

Germans,  Christianity  among,  53. 

Germanic  State  Church,  579-589. 

Gladiatorial  combats,  abolishment  of, 

389. 

Gnosticism,  50,  75-106, 126/.  See  also 
"Simon,"  "Menander,"  "Cerdo," 
"Basilides,"  "Valentinus,"  "Ptolo- 
maeus." 

Gospels,  35,  118,  120,  123. 

Grace,  controversy  on.  See  "Augus- 
tine," "Pelagian  Controversy," 
"Semi-Pelagian  Controversy." 

Gratian,  emp.,  366. 


Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  353,  496/. 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  502  /. 
Gregory  of  Tours,  571  /.,  581  /. 
Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  221  /. 
Gregory  the  Great,  388,  590-602. 

Hadrian,  emp.,  153. 

Hatfield,  council  of  (A.  D.  680),  612. 

Heathen  slanders  against  Christian- 
ity, 61-64. 

Heathenism,  repression  of,  285-287, 
320-322,  346/.,  370-374,  557- 

Heathenism,  revival  of,  330-336,  339. 

Heathenism  in  the  Church,  396/., 
400/. 

Heliogabalus,  emp.,  religious  policy 
of,  152. 

Henolicon  of  Zeno,  526-529. 

Heraclius,  emp.,  540,  660. 

Heraclius,  schism  of,  270. 

Heresy,  laws  against,  368,  372,  450- 

453- 

Heretics,  baptism  of.  See  "Bap- 
tism." 

Hermas,  43,  47,  48,  184. 

Hertford,  council  of  (A.  D.  672),  609^. 

Hierapolis,  council  of,  no. 

Hierarchy,  128/.,  237/.,  360  f.,  s^^f- 

Hieronymus.     See  "Jerome." 

Hilary  of  Poitiers,  316,  319. 

Hippolytus,  68,  105,  108,  175-178. 

Homoiousian  party,  rise  of,  315-320. 

Homoiousios,  316,  319,  348. 

Homoousios,  306,  309,  316,  319,  348. 

Honorius,  emp.,  420 

Honorius  of  Rome,  671/. 

Hormisdas  of  Rome,  536. 

Hosius,  299. 

Hospitality,  40. 

Hylics,  92/. 

Hymns,  Christian,  21,  173. 

Hypatia,  373. 

Hypostasis,  193,  300,  306,  309,  315, 
319,349/. 

Ibas.     See  "Three  Chapters,  contro- 
versy on." 
Iconoclasm,  684/. 
Ignatius  of  Antioch,  22,  30,  41  /. 
Images,  controversy  on,  684  jf. 
Incorruptibility,  136  ff. 
India,  Christianity  in,  55. 


INDEX 


703 


Irenaeus,  on  John,  26;  on  Gnosticism, 
78-81,  85/.,  92/.;  on  apostolic  tra- 
dition and  churches,  11 2-1 14;  on 
the  gospels,  120;  on  Apostles' 
Creed,  123^.;  on  redemption,  136- 
138;  on  eucharist,  139/.;  on  Easter 
controversy,  163/. 

Irene,  empress,  685. 

Istrian  schism,  596-600. 

Jerome,  on  fall  of  Rome,  421-423;  on 
text  of  New  Testament,  485;  on 
Origen,  486/. 

Jews,  relation  of,  to  the  Christians, 
14-18. 

John,  Apostle,  death  of,  9,  10;  chil- 
iastic  teaching,  26  /.;  in  Ephesus, 
114, 116,  118;  founds  order  of  bish- 
ops, 122. 

John  of  Damascus  on  images,  691- 
693- 

Jovian,  emp.,  2>31,  339- 

Julia  Mammasa,  153/. 

Julian,  emp.,  early  life,  325-329;  hab- 
its, 329/.;  opens  temples,  330;  his 
ecclesiastical  and  religious  policy, 
330-334;  forbids  Christians  to  teach 
classics,  ZUSZ^' 

Julius  of  Rome,  310;  epistle  of,  311; 
appeals  allowed  to,  364. 

Justin  Martyr,  on  Jews,  16;  extension 
of  Christianity,  18;  chiliastic  views, 
27;  on  Christian  worship,  32-35; 
defence  of  Christianity,  72-75,  135. 

Justin  I,  emp.,  540. 

Justinian  I,  emp.,  541;  anathematisms 
against  Origen,  542  /.;  Aphtharto- 
docetism,  553/.;  ecclesiastical  legis- 
lation, 383,  554-560. 

Lactantius,  206. 

Lamb  as  image  of  Christ,  678/. 

Laodicaea,  council  of  (c.  A.  D.  343), 

399/- 
Lapsi,  208-212,  214-217. 
Law,  Mosaic,  Gnostic  conception  of, 

95/.,  104. 
Laws  against  Christianity,  19-22,  56, 

145,  211. 
Laws  in  favor  of  the  Church,  281-285. 
Legacy-hunting  by  clergy  forbidden, 

381/. 


Legislation,  influence  of  the  Church 
on,  284/.,  385/- 

Leo  of  Rome,  on  the  Priscillianists, 
378;  on  auricular  confession,  384; 
on  clerical  celibacy,  417  /.,  repre- 
sents Roman  people,  476;  on  Petrine 
prerogatives,  476/.;  condemns  28th 
canon  of  Chalcedon,  478/.;  on  apos- 
tolic sees,  480;  his  course  in  Eutych- 
ian  controversy,  511/.;  his  Tofne, 

Libellatici,  158,  209/.,  214/. 
Libelli  pads,  187,  215,  292. 
Lihri  pmiitentiales,  626-630. 
Licinius,  emp.,  263-265. 
Little  Labyrinth,  173-175. 
Liutprand,  king,  659,  686-690. 
Logos,  72/.,  130-132,  171,  176,  193/., 

227/.,  298/.,  304,  313. 
Lombard  Church,  597/.,  683/. 
Lombards,  589,  600-602. 
Lord's  Day,  41,  232,  284. 
Lord's  Prayer  with  Doxology,  38. 
Lord's  Supper.     See  "Eucharist." 
Lucian  of  Samosata,  55,  59-61. 
Lucian  the  martyr,  303;  creed  of,  313. 
Luke,  Gospel  of,  mutilated  by  Mar- 

cion,  103, 
Luxeuil,  foundation  of,  587/. 

Macedonian  heresy,  353  /.,  524,  552, 

666. 
Magic  among  the  Gnostics,  80,  87. 
Malchion,  22$  f. 
Mani  and  Manichaeanism,  127,  252- 

256,  372;  laws  against,  375,  559  /.; 

persecution  of,  376;  Augustine  on, 

454/. 
Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  310^. 
Marcia,  concubine  of  Commodus,  69. 
Marcian,  emp.,  510. 
Marcion,  Gnostic,  103-106,  114,  119, 

122. 
Marcionites,  127. 

Marius  Mercator,  on  Pelagianism,  460. 
Mark,  Gospel  of,  123. 
Marriage,  Christian,  106,  108,  168/.; 

compared  with  virginity,  168,  393; 

indissolubility  of,  43,   169,  392  /., 

612;  second,  47,  169,  182. 
JMartin  of  Rome,  660. 
Martin  of  Tours,  410,  427^, 


704 


INDEX 


Martyrdom,  65  /.,  66-68. 
Martyrs,  anniversaries  of,  401;  merits 
of,  167,  187,  212/.;  intercession  of, 

399. 
Mary,  the  Virgin,  30,  70,  81;  is  Theo- 

tokos,  505,  511,  518,  520. 
Massilians,  467. 
Maximilla,     Montanist     prophetess, 

107/.,  no. 
Maximinus  Thrax,  emp.,  persecution 

under,  154/. 
Maximus  the  Confessor,  660. 
Melchizedek,  173. 
Meletius  and  the   Meletian   schism, 

266-270,  293/. 
Meletius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  349. 
Memnon  of  Ephesus,  504. 
Menander,  81. 
Merovingian  Church,  581  f. 
Methodius  of  Olympus,  his  theory  of 

recapitulation,  229/.;  on  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body,  230. 
Metropolitans,  361,  363/. 
Milan,  church  of,  596  ff. 
Milan,  edict  of,  263-265. 
Minucius  Felix,  61-64. 
Miracles,  Christian,  56,  153. 
Mithras,  34,  150/. 
Monarchian    controversies,    171-181, 

221-229. 
Monasteries,  subject  to  bishops,  407. 

See  also  "Monasticism." 
Monastic  rules.     See  "Basil,"  "Ben- 
edict   of    Nursia,"    "Pachomius," 

"Columbanus." 
Monasticism,  248-251,401-411, 586^., 

617/.,  630-644. 
Monophysite  churches,  538/. 
Monophysite  controversies,  51 1-5 14, 

516/.,  522-529. 
Monothelete   controversy,    516,    539, 

652/.,  660-672. 
Montanism  in  the  West,   145,   179, 

181/ 
Montanus  and  Montanism,   106  f., 

109/.,  120,  127,  372. 
Moralism  and  moralistic  Christianity, 

45/.,  134,  165/. 
Morality,  Christian,  28,  70^.,  188. 
Morality,  double,  46,  48. 
Moslems,  653-659. 
Muratorian  Fragment,  11 7-1 20. 


Natalius,  confessor,  174. 

Neo-Platonism,  202-204,  430  jf. 

Nepos,  schism  of,  219-221. 

Nero,  emp.,  persecution  by,  5-7,  9. 

Nestorian  controversy,  504-511. 

Nestorius,  fragments  on  the  doctrine 
of,  501  /. 

New-Nicene  Party,  348/. 

Nicaea,  council  of  (A.  D.  325),  292- 
295;  creed  of,  confirmed  at  Con- 
stantinople, A.  D.  381,  353;  canons 
of,  360-362,  412;  doctrine  of,  en- 
forced by  law,  368;  Goths  present 
at,  425;  (A.  D.  787),  definition  of, 
694-697. 

Nice,  Creed  of,  318. 

Ninian,  569. 

Noetus,  109,  175,  178. 

Novatian  and  Novatians,  217,  245, 
247,  295/.,  374- 

Oak,  synod  of  the,  492. 

Oblati,  639,  642. 

Oblation,  168. 

Offerings,  41. 

Optatus,  on  sacraments  and  the  Cath- 
olic Church,  446/. 

Orange,  council  of  (A.  D.  529),  can- 
ons of,  against  Pelagianism,  472- 
476. 

Ordination,  of  clergy,  41;  of  bishops, 

239- 

Origen,  144, 153;  on  eternal  generation 
of  the  Son,  193;  eternal  creation, 
194;  pre-existence  of  souls,  195;  re- 
demption, 196  /.;  universal  salva- 
tion, 198/.;  allegorism,  199;  perse- 
cution, 206;  martyrdom,  212  /.; 
errors  of,  486,  489;  condemnation 
of  by  Anastasius,  487/. 

Origenistic  controversies,  first,  483, 
486-493;  second,  541/- 

Original  Sin,  Augustine  on,  438-440; 
Pelagius  on,  458,  460,  464/.;  coun- 
cil of  Orange,  473-475- 

Orleans,  council  of  (A.  D.  511),  580, 
618;  (A.  D.  541),  618;  (A.  D.  549), 
580,  619. 

Orthodoxy,  enforcement  of,  367,  370, 

Ostrogoths,  Church  under,  529,/. 

Ousia  distinguished  from  hypostasis, 
348/. 


INDEX 


705 


Pachomius,  R^ile  of,  402-405. 

Palladius,  bishop  in  Ireland,  567. 

Pallium,  591,  604. 

Pantaenus,  55,  189. 

Papias,  chiliastic  ideas  of,  25  /. 

Paris,  council  of  (A.  D.  557),  581. 

Parish,  616-620. 

Patriarchates,  354,  359,  361. 

Patrick,  Irish  missionary,  567-569. 

Patripassianism,  125,  175^. 

Paul,  Apostle,  death  of,  8, 9,  23, 112/., 
116;  epistles  of,  68,  103/.,  119, 
122. 

Paul  of  Samosata,  221,  225-229. 

Paulinus  of  Antioch,  349. 

Paulus  Diaconus,  600^. 

Pelagian  controversy,  455-466. 

Pelagius,  455;  Augustine  on,  456  /.; 
statement  of  position,  457/.;  epistle 
to  Demetrias,  458-460;  his  confes- 
sion of  faith,  461;  condemnation  at 
Carthage,  463-465;  condemnation 
at  Ephesus,  508. 

Penances,  626-630. 

Penitential  discipline.  See  "Disci- 
pline, penitential." 

Pentecost,  feast  of,  165  /. 

Peregrinus  Proteus,  59-61. 

Perpetua  and  Felicitas,  Passion  of,  145- 
149. 

Persecution.  See  under  name  of  Em- 
peror. 

Persia,  Christians  in,  54. 

Peter,  Apostle,  death  of,  8;  at  Rome, 
9,  23,  112/.,  116,  123. 

Peter  of  Alexandria,  270. 

Peter  Fullo,  535/. 

Peter  Mongus,  535  /. 

Petrine  authority,  180,  186,  243  /., 
447,  477-481,  532. 

Philip,  Apostle,  death  of,  11. 

Philip  the  Arabian,  emp.,  religious 
policy  of,  156. 

Philippopolis,  council  of  (A.  D.  343), 
364. 

Philo  Judaeus,  135. 

Philosophy,  72/.,  78,  174,  190,  192. 

Phocas,  emp.,  595. 

Phrygian  heresy,  375.  See  "Mon- 
tanism." 

Pictures.     See  "Icons." 

Plato,  73/. 


Pleroma,  Gnostic  doctrine  of,  90. 
Pliny  the  Younger,  epistle  to  Trajan, 

19. 
Pneumatics,  93. 
Polycarp,  113,  129,  163/. 
Polycrates,  10,  162. 
Poor.     See  "Charity." 
Pope.     See  "Rome,  Bishop  of,"  also 

name  of  individual  popes. 
Pope,  title  of,  215,  408,  note. 
Porphyry,  epistle  to  Marcella,  202- 

204. 
Praxeas,  125/.,  178/. 
Prayer,  ssf.,  38,  72,  165,  184. 
Prayer,  times  of,  38,  166. 
Prayers  to  saints,  397-399. 
Predestination,  136,  440-442. 
Presbyter,  31,  37,  41,  82. 
Priscilla,  Montanist,  107,  no. 
Priscillianists,  375,  378/. 
Prophecy,    argument   from   Hebrew, 

74,  134- 
Prophets,  Christian,  40/. 
Prosecution  of  Christians,  20,  66-68. 
Pseudo-Dionysius.     See     "Dionysius 

the  Areopagite." 
Psychics,  92/. 
Ptolomaeus,  martyr,  65  /. 
Ptolomaeus,  93;  epistle  to  Flora,  95- 

102. 
Pulcheria,  empress,  512. 

Quartodecimans,  108. 

Quinisext  Council  (A.  D.  692),  413- 

415,  673-679. 

Ravenna,  exarchate  of,  653,  680,  684, 

686  jf. 
Real  Presence,  31,  34,  231,  235. 
Reccared,  Visigothic  king,  575-579. 
Redemption,  Asia  Minor  conception 

of,  136;  Origen's  conception,  196/. 
Regida  fidei,  125. 
Relics,  398. 
Remission  of  sin  after  baptism,  44, 

184. 
Resurrection  of  Christ,  59. 
Resurrection  of  the  body,  116,  230. 
Rhodon,  104/. 
Robber  synod  of  Ephesus  (A.  D.  449), 

512. 
Roman  government,  attitude  of,  to- 


7o6 


INDEX 


ward  Christians,  20-22,  64-69,  142- 
145,  151-154,  205-208,  258/. 

Rome,  appeals  to,  364-366. 

Rome,  bishops  of,  list  of,  113;  election 
of,  679-683. 

Rome,  councils  of,  under  Cornelius, 
217;  under  Julius,  310;  under  Mar- 
tin, 614,  664/. 

Rome,  see  of,  and  the  Unity  of  the 
Church,  240-245. 

Rome,  see  of,  authority  of,  potior 
pHncipalUaSy  113;  statement  of 
Siricius  on,  416;  causa  fittita  est, 
462/.;  statement  of  Leo  the  Great, 
480/.;  of  Gelasius,  532. 

Rome,  see  of,  separation  from  the 
Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  161-165. 

Rufinus,  489. 

Sabellius  and  Sabellianism,  180  /., 
223/-,  300,  309,  352,  354. 

Sacraments,  nature  of,  447,  449/.,  564. 
See  also  "Baptism"  and  "Euchar- 
ist." 

Sacrifice  of  the  mass,  622. 

Saints,  prayers  to,  397,  399. 

Sardica,  council  of  (A.  D.  343),  can- 
ons, 364. 

Saturninus,  Gnostic,  106. 

Schism.  See  under  "Novatian,"  "Fe- 
licissimus,"  "Meletius,"  "Hera- 
cHus,"  "Donatism,"  "Istrian." 

Schools,  mediaeval,  644,  650/. 

Scilitan  Martyrs,  66-68. 

Semi-Arians,  316. 

Semi-Pelagians,  466-476. 

Severus,  Alexander,  emp.,  religious 
pohcy  of,  152^. 

Severus,  Septimius,  emp.,  141-149. 

Simon  Magus,  78/.,  103. 

Siricius  of  Rome,  decretal  of,  415-417. 

Sirmium,  council  and  creed  of  (A.  D. 
357),  316. 

Sixtus  of  Rome,  211. 

Slaves,  manumission  of,  385,  387; 
canons  on  treatment  of,  386-388. 

Socrates,    Greek   philosopher,    72  /., 

131/- 
Socrates,  ecclesiastical  historian,  274. 
Soter  of  Rome,  24. 

Sozomen,  ecclesiastical  historian,  274. 
Spain,  Church  in,  53,  158,  575/- 


Spirit,  Holy,  133,  187,  349,  351,  353, 

577  /.     See  also  "  Trinity." 
State  Church,  356,  358-384,  553-557, 

579-585. 
Stephen  of  Rome,  242-245. 
SiihlntrodiictcB,  226,  412. 
Suevi,  571,  575/. 
Sulpicius  Severus,  410/.,  427^. 
Sunday,  35,  284. 
Sylvester  of  Rome,  291. 
Symbol.     See  "Creed." 
Symmachus  of  Rome,  530. 
Symmachus,  prefect  of  Rome,  339- 

342. 
Synods.     See   "Council"   and   under 

place-name. 
Syria,  Christianity  in,  54. 
Syzygies,  Gnostic  doctrine  of,  90,  94. 

Tabenna,  first  cloister,  402. 

Tacitus  on  Christians,  6. 

Tatian,  106/. 

Telemachus,  monk,  389. 

Temples,  destruction  of,  372/, 

Tertullian,  on  extension  of  Christian- 
ity, 52-54;  on  Gnostics,  77  /.;  on 
Marcion,  104;  on  apostolic  churches, 
114-116,  122,  129;  on  the  creed, 
125  /.;  in  defence  of  Christians, 
142/.,  145;  on  prayer,  165;  on  fast- 
ing, 166;  on  baptism,  167,  232/.;  on 
merit,  167  /.;  on  marriage,  168  /.; 
against  Praxeas,  178  /.;  on  disci- 
pline, 184-188. 

Theodelinda,  Lombard  queen,  597  /. 

Theodore  of  Canterbury,  organization 
of  English  Church,  609-614;  peni- 
tential, 627-629;  founds  schools, 650. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  his  creed, 
498-500;  fragments  on  Christology, 
500/.     See  also  "Three  Chapters." 

Theodoret  of  Cyrus,  127;  creed,  510. 
See  also  "Three  Chapters." 

Theodosius  I,  ecclesiastical  policy, 
352/.;  requires  orthodoxy,  367;  re- 
presses heathenism,  368;  massacre 
at  Thessalonica,  390/.;  dynasty  of, 
420/. 

Theodosius  II,  issues  Theodosian 
code,  424/.;  engages  in  Nestorian 
controversy,  504,  510;  in  Eutychian 
controversy,  511/. 


INDEX 


707 


Theodotus  of  Byzantium,  172. 
Theodotus    the    leather- worker,    no, 

173/. 

Theopaschites,  523,  541/. 

Theophilus  of  Alexandria,  attacks 
Chrysostom,  491-493. 

Theophilus  of  Antioch,  on  Logos  doc- 
trine, 132;  on  Trinity,  134. 

Theotokos,  Mary  as  the,  505,  511, 
518,  520. 

Three  Chapters,  controversy  on,  544- 
552;  condemnation  of,  551  /.; 
schisms  resulting  from  condemna- 
tion, 596/. 

Toledo,  council  of  (A.  D.  531),  on 
schools,  649;  (A,  D.  589),  conver- 
sion of  Visigoths,  575-579. 

Toleration  of  Christians  by  Edict  of 
Milan,  263  ff. 

Tradition,  109,  in  f.;  Basil  on, 
484. 

Traditores,  291/. 

Trajan,  emp.,  epistle  to  Pliny,  22. 

Trinity,  132  f.,  171-181,  222-225, 
368. 

Trisagion,  541/. 

True  Word  of  Celsus,  56-59. 

Typos  of  Constans  II,  662-664. 


Valens,  emp.,  337,  339. 
Valentinian  I,  emp.,  337^. 
Valentinus,  Gnostic,  78,  88-95,  106, 

120. 
Valerian,  emp.,  persecution  under,  205, 

210/. 
Vicariate  of  Aries,  591/. 
Victor  of  Rome,  162  Jf.,  174. 
Victorinus,  philosopher,  431-433. 
Vigilantius,  397  ff. 
Vigilius  of  Rome,  his  Judicakim,  544; 

oath  to  Justinian,  545;  Constitutum, 

547-551- 
Vincent  of  Lerins,  rule  of  Catholic 

faith,  471;  on  grace,  472. 
Virgin-birth  of  Jesus,  30,  31. 
Virginity    compared    with    marriage, 

168,  393/. 
Visigothic  Church,  575-579- 

Whitby,  council  of,  605  ff. 

Will,  freedom  of,  Theophilus  on,  134; 

Pelagius  on,  457  /.;  John  Cassian 

on,  469. 
Worship,  Christian,  21,  32-35,  38  f., 

156,  165,  231-237,  578. 

Xystus  of  Rome.     See  "Sixtus." 


Ulfilas,  425-427;  his  creed,  426. 
Unity  of  the  Church,  240-245. 
Universal  salvation,  198. 


Zeno,  emp.,  Henolicon,  526-529. 
Zephyrinus  of  Rome,  176/. 
Zosimus  of  Rome,  on  Pelagius,  463. 


'^""t^fv,  ^,. 


^mmmm^m^^^ 


^m^'»i>>mim^^ 


RINTED  IN  U.S. 


BW935  .A97 

A  source  book  for  ancient  church 


Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00015  8842 


